The French presidential election has come down to a choice between two evils – one greater and one lesser. Liberals ‘everywhere’ are demanding that voters put their cross, tick or mark next to the neo-liberal banker Macron to thwart the chauvinistic nationalism of Le Pen. For what it’s worth, that’s their ‘lesser of two evils’ argument.

I had lunch in a Parisian cafe recently with a journalist who had spent the whole French presidential campaign vilifying the leftwing candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon and trumpeting the merits of the centrist Emmanuel Macron in the columns of a respected (if declining) centre-left weekly.

I asked him if had there been a deliberate effort among intellectuals and mainstream politicians to engineer a run-off between Macron and the far-right Marine Le Pen in the second round of the presidential election. “Why, of course,” he laughed. “We’ve been at it for a year.” Considering how obvious the strategy had been, I cannot claim to have revealed much of a secret. Still, it’s nice to know I was not being paranoid.

The crucial bit Tonneau misses, is that alongside the vilification of Mélenchon, there was the hyping of Le Pen. She was the ‘bogey man’, set to deliver France to Macron and liberalism.

Liberal media keep doing this – perversely building up chauvinistic nationalism and/or its spores by running around like the ‘bubble-headed booby’ from Lost in Space screeching “Warning! Warning! Danger, Will Robinson!” – and pointing to the threat they themselves are busy trying to fashion from muck they’ve scooped up.

It was the basic game that played out in the US. Sanders was vilified. Trump was hyped. And Clinton stood by, ready to sweep to victory, courtesy of the assuredly negative reaction to the ‘pussy grabbing and what-not’ hype of Trump. In that instance it didn’t work out.

In the UK, where the ‘bogey man’ has been UKIP – while Labour has been relentlessly hammered across all media because Corbyn and “left” – well, it kind of isn’t working out there either. UKIP policies now appear to be part and parcel of the Tory – Ukip in suits – election package.

But let’s assume this works out in France – that voters flock to Macron and the chauvinistic nationalism of Le Pen is temporarily set back? What then?

France had the notion after WW2 that they’d be the coachman of Europe driving the German workhorse of Europe. Herr Schäuble will be disavowing them of that notion under a Macron presidency. The neo-liberal Macron will use his Presidency to lay the groundwork for the Troika to triumphantly drag the chains and shackles of austerity up the Champs-Élysées. And against a likely backdrop of growing resentment, the liberal establishment will continue to vilify the left and fear monger around a chauvinistic right. They’ll be banking that a crushed left and the fear of the ‘bogey man’ will keep delivering the voters back their way. But it’s not going to work forever. At some point, people will have had enough and cast around for somewhere else, or someone else or anything else to give their vote to.

But where will they go if the liberal establishment’s hammering of “the left” has been successful? And by the way, it has to be successful, because liberalism, in France as in other places, now depends to an extent on being an undisturbed parasite within the host body of Left parties. (Macron spawned from the French Socialist Party)

It ends badly. Liberalism yet again (not entirely unlike the 20s and 30s) successfully suppresses “the left” and becomes the handmaiden to forms of fascism.

So maybe if you happen to be French, have a vote and want liberalism ended to create the space for the beginnings of a decent society; even just a social democratic one that puts society before finance, then cast some form of tactical vote for Le Pen.

And then, crucially, organise and agitate like a bunny.

Le Pen would head the powerful Council of Ministers (essentially the Cabinet) who are appointed from the National Assembly. But the Front National currently has a grand total of only 2 members from a total of 577 elected members of the National Assembly and the next election for the National Assembly is on 11th and 18th of June. It would look like a one term, lame duck Presidency is in the offing, as opposed to a powerful Macron Presidency enjoying support from his old party and from across the political spectrum.

Under Le Pen, media will have lost the ‘bogey man’ that’s meant to deliver voters back to the tender mercies of the bankers and financiers and they’ll be hard pushed to vilify “the left” during the term of a Le Pen presidency when that would only serve to bolster the chauvinistic nationalism they apparently regard as being so ghastly.

And in that scenario, “the left” gets space to breath – to prosper and grow, while liberalism and threats of totalitarianism both fade as a direct result of that.

Aw, but you know what? Whether you’re French or not and regardless of what situation liberalism’s creating in your country, it’s maybe for the best if you don’t bother yourself by thinking about it. It’s probably safer and easier to just keep following instructions. Do your docile duty and vote for the supposed lesser of the two evils and at best wind up snaggled in a liberal hell stretching down through an endless stream of tomorrows. Aye… do that.

138 comments on “Bringing Liberalism Down.”

The heading is somewhat misleading compared to the rest of the post. Most informed people know that neo-liberalism benefits only a small part of the population. Those supporters who believe that the trickle-down theory still works are sadly mistaken.
Canada, federally and provincially has successfully, the Liberal Party for many years.
Terminology is rather important.

I dunno. The lessor of two evils argument is subjective. I’d rather have anyone than trump including a neolib. And this poor shafted Bernie by the neolibs line – talk about fragilisation trev. Bernie is a seasoned politician who has survived – he just lost the numbers.

Meat. Major export for NZ. So climate change means meat alternatives are on the rise, while costs of production are rising. Drug resistance means chemical washes are even more needed in getting food to a retail quality. And thirdly, fewer customers as market give all the added value to fewer and fewer stomaches, sorry, rich customers. This is as you point out, neo-lib, leave value for the market to concentrate in fewer hands. Wakeup NZ its not just financial markets on a precipice, its the whole economy.

“The fading American dream: Trends in absolute income mobility since 1940”

In short, social mobility has undergone a drastic, continual decline in America since the 1940s.Poverty is entrenched and multigenerational. Before you say ‘Well duh,’ I’m offering this as empirical information in arguments to counter the neoliberal bullshit about ‘meritocracy’.

I really have a great deal of difficulty in the kind of sophistry that in its ultimate meaning boils down to ‘vote for a fascist and a racist, it’ll be good in the long run.’ I’ll file that alongside ‘a simple plan’ and ‘what could possibly go wrong?’

I draw an absolute line at voting for fascism. Neoliberalism is not the only evil in the world and it’s naive to think that letting a fascist in is only going to serve the medium-term aim of combatting neoliberalism and nothing more. It has its own agenda as we all know.

The enemy of my enemy is not my friend; the enemy of my enemy will use me as a weapon if I let them.

The post header speaks of liberalism, not neo-liberalism. That’s because I’m talking about liberalism.

Liberalism is neither left nor progressive and contains within it the seeds of totalitarianism. Those seeds seem to always sprout when a general disillusion with hopelessly endless liberal reforms reach a given point.

I’d argue we’re at that point, and so face a certain urgency in giving effective expression to progressive/left ideas.

Two forces oppose progressive/left politics. One is liberalism and the other is authoritarianism, and like I say, they both go hand in glove to some extent.

I might hold some hope that France is currently in a unique situation whereby there’s potential for progressives and leftists to break society free from the influence of both of those forces.

So Front National and UKIP, those fellas from the 30s and many others besides, do not and did not emerge from a ‘stressed’ liberal environment, and did not ‘take off’ from the back of widespread disillusionment with liberal, reformist parties, but rather, came from outer space or some such?

Bill. Again. Your use of “Liberal” is almost the opposite of the common understanding of the word.

Which sort of obscures your meaning.

Note. “Liberal” in the USA also does not mean the same as it does in the UK and NZ.

Neo-Liberal is not my favourite term, but it has become the description for a self serving form of Liberalism which consists of only one “freedom”. That of the rich to make money, by ripping off the rest of us, and to keep it.

Note: Neo-Liberals are very keen on Government control of private ownership, and copyright laws and supplying Police forces and Armies. Not so keen on regulation of business, monopolies, safety and environmental standards, except where it keeps their market dominance.

The meaning of liberal is the same everywhere. If you want to limit criticism to the economic sphere, then sure, maybe use the term neo-liberal. (Though in reality, economically it’s no different from classical liberalism)

To my mind the problem and danger we face is far broader than mere economics and encompasses the entire liberal ideology.

As I’ve said in comments elsewhere, the liberal project is and always has been a secular version of ye olde Christian universality that sought to “save” all the heathens (usually by delivering them straight off to heaven). With liberalism, “one way” has replaced “one God”. It has to go.

Maybe it’s because of the perceived innate goodness that liberals have of liberalism that leads them to be wedded to notions of reform (incrementalism), but whatever the reason, it means they are not progressive. Liberal incrementalism then, is a barrier to deep systemic change.

And that’s hugely problematic in contexts such as AGW that demand urgent and radical changes – ie, the rapid development and adoption of new economic, cultural and political paradigms

Yes there is a difference between classical history ( Sumerians through to Roman ) the history of the Enlightenment period of Europe , and the history of the post industrial revolution onward’s to late 19th century and 20th century political thought.

It is because of many of the false imperial assumptions based on error designed to enhance the superiority of one race over another and finding false reasons for their 19th century notions of ‘ manifold destiny ‘ that many of our ANZAC soldiers lie in their graves.

Fighting FASCISM. More specifically in the 20th century , – NAZISM.

And MOST people think Fascism and its NAZI ghost was laid to rest in 1945.

And while this is very ‘ Euro – centric’ ,- it also has much to do with modern day NZ , – whether we like it or NOT.

And to which we would expect far , far more from our politicians to at LEAST display some sort of knowledge of what our troops were exactly fighting against and for than they have done over the last 33 years of the neo liberal bastardization of our democracy.

Wild Katipo
Your comment about where fascism lies now and the lack of knowledge about its past history reminds me of a recent comment.

Hundertwasser is the project de jour in Whangarei where they are trying to get enough money to establish a museum that will feature his work (also Maori creative work and historical). The comment from an elderly man there about Hundertwasser was that he was in the Hitler Youth, implying that he was tainted by Hitler and Nazism.

This man couldn’t think how deeply he is immersed in NZ society, and could well have trained as a cadet at school, belonged to the territorials, etc. In a time of intense patriotism people join up to groups or are forced by peers and conformity, they get enthused to belong to the group and go and do things with others that are approved of by the society that you are in.

It seems to me that our understanding of our world is hardly higher and less effective than an ant’s is. Despite our celebrated universal education we are not taught or encouraged to think widely and critique our society, and ourselves personally, or the actual material and
facts and conclusions that are passed to us. (If we had been thinking, we would not have accepted Roger Douglas et al and have saved ourselves from suffering a fragmented deteriorating country.)

Mind you , this is different from the focus of the main article , which is the dilemma the French now find themselves in,… barring the same sort of subterfuge that is obviously guiding certain political party’s tactical decisions , …

Or is it?

On the one hand , we have overt fascism, on the other , we have covert fascism…

Both vying for control.

The trick is,… how to drive a wedge between the two and neutralize both of the shitter’s ? , … And be under no illusion , – liberals are nothing more than insipid sweaty soft palmed control freaks with steel fangs , when you start threatening their cash stack potential…

OK, now I get that you’re writing about liberalism instead of neoliberalism as I’d assumed/interpreted. I’m afraid however that to me this is even worse (I see neoliberalism and its resulting plutocracy being a greater threat to freedom than liberalism).

I do get your implied argument that liberal reform often amounts to a band aid on cancer, that mitigating symptoms allows the underlying structural evils to continue but I think that you’re stretching things to conflate liberalism with authoritarianism and claim that they’re symbiotic (in effect, not intention).

I must say again that a ‘strategic’ vote for fascist forces is not a solution, medium or long term. Their stated opposition to liberalism and neoliberalism does not mean that they’re going to facilitate the progressive left at all. Quite the opposite as history has shown.

I’m not conflating liberalism and authoritarianism. I’m arguing that when liberalism loses its sheen people look to alternatives, and the only alternatives available in situations where the left has been suppressed are authoritarian ones.

Liberals today are marginalising the left/progressives. And as far as my knowledge serves me, they marginalised the left/progressives during the 20s and 30s too.

I’m also not suggesting that fascist forces facilitate the progressive left. I’m saying that they, or hyped fears about them, are used by liberals to bolster their own position at the expense of the left/progressives – it’s a dangerous game that didn’t end well last time around and, somewhat predictably, will end badly this time around too.

But right now, in France, leftists/progressives have (I’m arguing) an opportunity to neuter the liberals and end the prospects of fascists.

edit – the opportunity is presented because the Front National has next to no representation in the National Assembly, and who-ever is President must form their Council of Ministers from elected representatives of that Assembly.

WK
We live in interesting times, and have to plot our way through dangerous waters. We might make it if we keep alert, not too fearful, not overly venturesome. The Titanic was well built but I understand that people crewing it were too reliant on its hype, and dropped the cautious good
practices. We have already done that. We are post-Titanic but our vessel hasn’t gone down yet and we are trying to patch it and sail back to harbour.

In France they are in between a rock and a hard place. So Bill’s planning might work. It’s a special bespoke model made to fit the place and the fashion of the times. It would have to sail between the reefs – take a calculated risk, and a lot of political and psychological skill.

Sorry, you can interpret ‘conflate’ loosely. However you did say ‘hand in glove.’

Liberals today are marginalising the left/progressives.

OK, that’s the Fabian versus revolutionary conflict and could be explored in another thread: “does liberalism serve to mitigate and thus perpetuate structural inequality or does its cumulative effect result in real change over time?”

I’m also not suggesting that fascist forces facilitate

You appear to suggest that the effect putting a fascist in the presidency would serve as a mechanism to advance the left. I argue that Le Pen is smart and will have her own agenda and she will not in any way help the left in the short, medium or long term and may do irreparable harm. Fear of fascism is not ‘hype.’

liberals to bolster their own position at the expense of the left/progressives

Agreed – my beef with The Guardian is pretty much yours. Political homeopathy, a band aid on cancer, fairweather friends and all that.

But right now, in France, leftists/progressives have (I’m arguing) an opportunity to neuter the liberals and end the prospects of fascists.

That is where I disagree. I don’t think that a fascist leader is in any way an opportunity. There will be no silver lining in this cloud. Rather than being constrained by the more moderate representatives, she would ‘legitimise’ far-right demagoguery and authoritarianism, especially so after Trump – and she’d only give further support to him.

I’m suggesting Le Pen as President would create a situation, not serve as a mechanism. And as I say in the post, it would be absolutely necessary for the left to agitate and organise like bunnies were the situation to arise.

Fear of fascism isn’t hype, but fascism can be hyped – ie, made to seem like a clear and present danger in situations where it really isn’t. And no, I’m not saying expressions of fascism should be treated lightly, but they should be evaluated accurately and soberly – and that is not something that msm have being doing.

Except that the post (to follow your comparison) is not arguing that Front National is better than Macron and his future backers. The post is about how the left can successfully navigate its way beyond two hells.

Well to be honest Bill – I see it as much the same vein as CVs dissertations which invariably led to tearing down the current institutions and way of life in the hope that we’ll come out the other end in a better place.

France should be something most of the left hold up as highlighting the achievements of hard left economics. Instead it shows how they ultimately fail and doom large sections of society (such as youth) to a depressing status that they struggle to get out from.

……………………………………………………..
Who Is The Mont Pelerin Society ?
……………………………………………………..

This looting and destruction of the nation-state of New Zealand was planned and implemented by the London-based Mont Pelerin Society.

In 1947, Mont Pelerin founder von Hayek lamented that the war had drastically strengthened nation-states, which must be replaced, he said, with the classic, anti-state free trade “liberalism” of eighteenth and nineteenth century Britain.

Many of those continental Europeans present, like von Hayek, carried the prefix “von” before their surnames, signifying that they came from the noble families which had governed Europe for centuries.

Mont Pelerin shared the same “conservative revolution” philosophy as the Nazis. It also shared some of the same personnel.

For instance, Max von Thurn und Taxis was a sponsor of von Hayek and his new society. Thurn und Taxis’ family had founded another society in southern Germany before World War 1, which was composed entirely of aristocrats, known as the Thule Society.

Thule in turn formed a special “workers division” known as the “National Socialist German Workers Party” (NSDAP). The NSDAP, into which an Austrian corporal named Adolf Hitler was recruited, later became better known by the abbreviated version of its name, the “Nazis.”

In 1989, Max von Thurn und Taxis attended a meeting of his Mont Pelerin Society in Christchurch, New Zealand, to judge, first hand, the results of the “worlds most radical free market revolution.”

” A primary focus of the Thule Society was a claim concerning the origins of the Aryan race. In 1917, people who wanted to join the “Germanic Order”, out of which the Thule Society developed in 1918, had to sign a special “blood declaration of faith” concerning their lineage:

“The signer hereby swears to the best of his knowledge and belief that no Jewish or coloured blood flows in either his or in his wife’s veins, and that among their ancestors are no members of the coloured races.”
……………………………………………………………..

The left have to be prepared to share power and ideas. Think if Hillary and Bernie had actually joined forces and defeated Trump. Yes, Hillary would have to give up some of her neoliberal ideas and Bernie might have to shift some of his views as well. But overall it would be a better outcome for both Bernie, Hillary and the rest of the USA and now looking like the world.

Likewise if UK Labour were prepared to support Corbyn and reach a settlement of ideas. Then Brexit might not have happened and May being in charge and about to create a train wreck of the UK (and possibly take EU down too).

The we have NZ. If NZ Labour had accepted Cunliffe and if Cunliffe had been able to reach a compromise with the ABC’s, Greens, NZ First and Mana then we might have had a different election result. (Of course that might have been the toxic electoral advice given, who knows).

Likewise with the Greens, if Sue Bradford and Metiria had been able to reach a compromise that allowed both to stay in the Greens. Too many key Green MP’s seem to be leaving and their votes are static. Getting rid of the activists and putting in the careerists seem to be the opposite of what they should be doing – at a time where there is the biggest backlash against the mainstream!

Key and English were rivals, but although I personally think Key has been appalling for NZ, at least he was able to reach out to English, offer him a decent position and move on. That approach kept him in power for 3 terms!

At least a little hope for the future with Andrew Little taking a collaborative approach. Reaching out to the Greens and to NZ First. I think if they reached to Mana too, then they would be on even firmer ground.

There needs to be multiple views not just one or two with a fixed idea around the ‘working’ class and ‘gender and race’ equality from the ‘elite’ who talk for ‘all’ . One of the biggest issues I see with Labour and Greens is that it is the middle class MP’s who have never been poor or marginalised putting their often impractical policy views on others, which are irrelevant and out of date with 21st century globalism.

Of course National are far worse!! They just openly lie straight to voters faces and are actively trying to generate social injustice. Think guarding WINZ offices so that those that need welfare can’t even get in!

It will be those politicians that can collaborate and who can reach new ideas that voters like, that will be the winners.

And those world electoral teams that are engineering all these battles between neoliberals against right wing nationalists might find that the result is much worse for world stability than just trying to create more equality in each country by using left ideas, and reaching common and practical ground.

“Tactical vote for fascism so the left will do better than it does under liberalism” is an interesting idea, but “interesting” covers a lot of territory, not necessarily including “good.” It always astonishes me there are people who’d rather vote fascist than liberal, but I guess it shouldn’t.

The tactical vote for Le Pen sounds like the sort of clever idea that can go badly wrong, TBH. In the long term it’s better to be straightforward; Support the candidate you prefer most, and if you can’t bring yourself to support any, then abstain.

The fact is, these useful idiot ‘journalists’ couldn’t bring themselves to support Jean-Luc Melenchon for one reason, and one reason only: he tells the truth about the European Union. Macron does not, so he’s their man. The surprising part is that they were able to be honest about neglecting their journalistic duty and blatantly playing surrogate for him (I guess the media is the surrogate daddy to the surrogate mummy he met at high school eh?).

In their journalistic capacity, they aren’t working towards informing the public, and they don’t care a shred about France. They are thralls of the European Union. They share the aspirations of Martin Schulz, Guy Verhofstadt, and of course Jean-Claude Juncker: three political re-treads (or should that be skidmarks?) who seem to love the idea of a European superstate more than the sovereignty of their own nations.

In the context of Bill’s excellent thought provoking piece, the pursuit of liberalism at all costs can and has had negative consequences beyond all belief.
If he is right, then surely you and others would take pause to consider this. I don’t think its is helpful to see it in such a black and white way.

He is saying I think that the suppression of the left by liberal intellectuals and media paved the way for the fascist and communist authoritarian regimes of the last century – a failure of massive proportions to the notion of liberalism.

Since the 19th century there has been raging philosophical debate about liberalism and where it sits within the spectrum of the limitations of the power of authorities vs the rights of individuals.

The left favours an idea of social liberalism that seeks freedom from abuse and inequality, whereas the right seeks the freedom of the individual – to either succeed or fail. For both centre right and left, liberalism is important, although expressed in different ways.

Liberalism is just a word. One needs to look at the ideas and policies of persons who call themselves, or are labelled, liberals, and these seem to change with the passage of time. The same applies to “fascism”, though few would call themselves this because of the term’s pejorative connotations.

Bill you need to re-think what success feels like.
The right is winning across the developed world.
The strongly socialist parties are barely registering in the polls.
The remaining social democrat parties are going backwards at a rate of knots:

Greece: PASOK nearly wiped out since being at 44% in 2009
UK: UK Labour trailing by 12% going into election despite socialist leader Corbyn
Spain: PSOE vote collapsed to 22.6%
Netherlands: Dutch Labour at 5.7%
Iceland: Social Democrat Alliance down to 5.7%
Sweden: Social Democrat Party now down to 20.8%
Ireland: Irish Labour at 6.6%
Luxembourg: Socialist Workers at 20.2%
Canada: New Democratic Party at 19.7%
Germany: The Left Party under 10%, Social Democratic Party currently 27%

Don;t even ask about the global chances of Greens in Parliament anywhere beyond 1 or 2 seats tops. Other than here.

All we can do right now inside democratic representation is save what we have from further annihilation.

Five years ago, it would have been a real stretch to imagine Melenchon getting about 20% of the vote….or someone like Jeremy Corbyn becoming leader of UK Labour…or the Canadian Liberals (somewhat cynically) outflanking the New Democrats on the left to secure electoral victory….or Bernie Sanders coming so close to ‘rolling’ the Democratic party…

I’m not familiar enough with a number of those parties you’ve listed to know whether they are ‘captured’ left parties (like NZ Labour) or if they have held somewhat true to their founding principles and values.

But the fact that almost all mainstream media hammers any reasonable expression of leftist politics should be telling you something Ad. And that they remain on a steadily upward incline in spite of ‘blanket’ negative press should tell you something else in addition.

I’m not quite sure what it is you’re trying to save, or on the assumption it’s liberalism you’re referring to, why you’d want to save it. It fundamentally acts against progressive/leftist interests.

It’s the extremes on the rising hard right that need worrying about rather than attacking the remaining centre left. They are on the rise and will be defeated not by countering with more extremism that is a perpetual downwards vortex, but by appealing to calm and stability.

Your point about mainstream media and the left I have no sympathy for. The MSM hammer the hard right far more. And if the left haven’t figured out how to communicate around the MSM by now, they have lost everyone under 40 well and truly.

I can tell you what I’m trying to save.
And I can define it better than you can define “liberalism”.
But that’s another post entirely.

And well done you for missing the point I make that in spite of msm hammerings, the left is experiencing a steady rise. What it hasn’t really had is that widespread multi-country break-through. Yet.

There has been Scotland where the avowedly social democratic SNP sits on about 50% after 10 years in government (which is a beginning or a stepping stone) and the situation in France would seem to be presenting an opportunity for it to happen there now.

If we want to see the rising ‘hard’ right cede ground to the remaining centre left, these parties need do only one thing: start showing some respect for the abandoned working class, whose message is perfectly clear.

They want their sovereignty back. They want their borders protected. They want to see unemployment slashed, housing fixed, and health and education systems functioning before half of the third world is let in, and to that end they want to see the wars which create these refugees and the deficits which are run to fund them brought to an end.

Instead they get nonces like Hillary Benn worrying about how to bomb Syria (the govenment of course, not the extremists!) while their social system is getting torn to pieces by the tories; in France they get Marie Antoinette-Macron referring to the spate of terrorist attacks in France as an ‘imponderable problem’; and in Canada, they get Justin Bieber Turdeau being more interested in making any criticism of Islamic extremism prosecutable Islamophobia under M103 while working class Canadians try and figure out how to pay their heating bills.

That’s over-view (not those examples) is precisely what was pointed out to Andrew Little back when he was contesting the leadership of the Labour Party.

The example used was the popularity of the SNP running on basic social democratic principles. It elicited blank stares – a certain dumbfounded non-knowledge.

He was then asked when or if Labour would publicly acknowledge and apologise for ’84. The room got animated in a positive way. But again, no dice.

And that’s the thing about the so-called “remaining centre left” – it’s not. It’s liberal and it’s not focused on us or our world and or experiences. it’s almost as though all of that (us and our shit) is an adjunct to some greater purpose or design we’re simply not privy to. Of course, there is no greater purpose or design, just disconnect and cluelessness.

The left is stuck with two turds which won’t flush. First, 70s intellectuals with their insistence on carving the working class up into ‘communities’ who can all be bought with special interests in some kind of competition with one another, instead of just cooperating. Second, 80s neoliberals who took the blue pill of Austrian economics and formed a coalition with 70s intellectuals to outflank those who resisted their Balkanization of working people, in the process making pretty much all of the institutional left into useful idiots of capital and the plaything of sociopathic anti-western ‘internationalists’ who share the monetarists’ desire to end the nation-state. For different reasons of course, but it all follows that path of people creating little ponds to rule over instead of sharing the lake, without realising that their ponds aren’t strong enough to resist what’s coming.

No. Le Pen doesn’t lose her “monster status” – the liberal establishment loses its its ability to hype her ‘bogey man’ status in a way that sends voters fearfully scurrying into their clutches while they simultaneously do what they can to demolish the left.

It’s the loss of their ability to vilify the left that gives the left space.

There are elections to the assembly next month. The Front National are not going to go from two members to some scores of members in those elections.

What does the self assigned credibility of fascists mean when ‘no-one’ votes for their party? Where is the advantage to fascists in losing the hype afforded them thus far by liberal media?

The result of going with the ‘lesser of two evil’ argument is that the left is marginalised and vilified by liberals when it’s only the left that can avoid the scenario of desperate people turning to ‘a Le Pen’ in significant numbers as the only alternative to liberalism.

Of course she does. President Le Pen turns out not to be all that bad. The sky doesn’t fall in. They get a platform in the middle of the establishment. Having a fascist leader becomes normal. That will lead to assembly votes – not a landslide, but more than a trivial number and again, enough to normalise fascism.

Under a liberal regime, the left can pick up votes just as much as the right. Even more – look at SNP. There will always be swings and roundabouts in any form of democracy, but voting for fascists is voting for a move away from democracy. I’ve never gone along with the idea that sudden and abject surrender is the best form of attack. Why, when the liberals lose votes to a fascist, would that mean that the left would be in a better position? “Space to breathe”? The fascists won’t pause for breath.

But my main objection is that anyone who votes for a fascist is voting for a fucking fascist, even if they try to justify it as some cunning plan to move left from liberalism. It’s literally ticking a box to endorse a fascist as leader.

I don’t have many categorical imperatives in my moral framework, but “never vote for a fucking fascist” is definitely in there. They will never be able to claim my support. Anyone who follows your plan… not so much.

edit – the National Assembly elections take place in little over one month’s time. You seriously suggesting the Front National can get traction between now and then? I mean, you do know how the French electoral system works, yes? (I linked in the post if you don’t)

edit the second: I’m suggesting that FN could increase their vote, and the more votes they get without actually getting control of the assembly then the more normalised they will be. The backlash will only happen after they gain power and show their true colours. Like trump.

I’m assuming Macron will become President. At which point, keep your ears open for the sound of ‘the Troika’s’ iron being dragged up the Champs-Élysées.

And come the next Presidential elections, watch some authoritarian fuck waltz into the position of President with much, much more potential backing in the National Assembly than Le Pen could currently even dream of. 🙁

Well, if there’s any validity to that charge, that doesn’t mean that the only alternative is authoritarianism.

Liberalism likes to take many of the sentiments of the left and do nothing with them. That is why there is an overlap with leftists. But the main characteristic is to do nothing, so disengagement with liberals also increases engagement with people looking for concrete action.

Unless the main “left” entities shoot themselves in the foot (Jim fucking Anderton), they’ll always have that advantage of concrete activity over liberals. Look at how Sanders came into a party and within a couple of years was a credible contender for the nomination. A liberal couldn’t do that with vague nothings. A fascist can only do that if nobody takes them seriously and especially if their opposition is divided (look at trump vs 16 other contenders). But a liberal against 15 liberals/conservatives just disappears in the grey.

Are you drawing a blank because you’re looking at it in a vacuum? If we take the position that the left is targeted by msm because it’s a threat to liberalism, when a bigger threat to liberalism comes along, that threat will instead gain the attention of msm, surely?

At the moment the media managed to crap on the left, so a chunk of folks voted fascist in the first round. Now the msm is crunching on Le Pen (and rightfully).

Sooner or later liberalism will fall. All things do. The question is whether it falls to the left or to the right. What the left should do is give liberalism a nudge when the liberal bicycle is wobbling to the left, not to the right. The result will be a mixture of judgement and luck.

No. I’m drawing a blank because authoritarianism increases as democracy decreases. And the only meaningful expression of democracy I’m aware of exists on the left.

That (meaningful democracy) is always going to be the main threat to Liberalism outside of any external authoritarianism or totalitarianism (eg – state communism).

And of course liberal msm are now hounding the ‘bogey man’ they hyped. But like I say in the post, that tactic’s got a shelf life and has already failed in other places (maybe most notably in the US).

All things fall, as you say, but I’d be saying it matters whether it gives way to something liberatory or authoritarian rather than whether it falls left or right. (there are plenty of non-liberatory factions and schools of thought on both left and right)

Read the post again and then tell me where there is any suggestion that fascism or any other authoritarianism should be encouraged or normalised.

You may think that a chauvinistic nationalist having a single term as a President in France with no support from the National Assembly and against a backdrop of a left that is busy organising in an environment lacking in liberal msm vilification being angled left would ‘normalise’ fascism. But you’d have to put forward an argument rather than just throwing one liners.

As for the suggestion that liberalism cannot accommodate fascism (fascism being worse for liberalism than democracy), you might want to reflect on liberalism’s relations with the fascist government in the Ukraine – the one that EU governments aided and abetted. Or Turkey, or Saudi Arabia or former relations with Chile, Columbia and a list of other countries past and present as long as a double length ‘cotton soft’)

No vote for either fascism nor liberalism will aid the emergence of meaningful democracy or even just the emergence of social democracy – but creating a situation where those two tendencies are weakened holds potential.

… liberalism’s relations with the fascist government in the Ukraine – the one that EU governments aided and abetted. Or Turkey, or Saudi Arabia or former relations with Chile, Columbia and a list of other countries past and present…

It’s “liberalism”that has/had relationships with those countries, not governments with perceived national interests to promote? Since when?

“Chauvinistic nationalist”? Le Pen is a fascist. Dressed up compared to her dad, but still a fascist.

And liberals will also work internationally with any “meaningfully democratic” country you care to mention. But to actually have either a democratic or authoritarian government in their own country? Either can be bad for business, but fascists have quicker courts.

And if liberalism can accommodate fascism in its own country, how would voting for a fascist weaken either?

The history of liberalism joining up with totalitarianism has modern examples as well. Ukraine and the former Yugoslavia come to mind.

The other is the damage that liberalism did in Russia, and look how that turned out – so much fun for LGBTI people, not to mention the arrest and detaining of political opponents. Some whom, just happen to be friends of mine.

So firstly, there’s a huge difference between neoliberalism and liberalism. I believe in liberal values. I despise neoliberalism, because it pretends to be liberal why kicking you in the stomach to steal your lunch money. (ie. actually being right-wing)

Secondly, the choice between Macron and Le Pen in france is not a “false dichotomy.” This is how a runoff election works, the second round is a real dichotomy. Voters actually need to choose between voting for Macron, voting for Le Pen, and abstention. Abstention might indicate a genuine dissatisfaction with both choices, but there is a legitimate argument that in a runoff system like the French Presidential vote, you should vote for the lesser evil in the second round, because you’ve already had your chance to get other candidates over the line.

Defeating Le Pen is a good idea, especially if French voters actually like the EU. Nationalism is a problem, even if it’s “nice” left-wing nationalism like Labour’s dipping its foot into.

All French politics said and done, moderate nationalism is never a problem. Particularly when the general populace says so.

This playing one off against another is a dangerous game and is not always as cut and dried as it seems at first. Even the Romans saw that . Perhaps Bill is right. Perhaps that is the only way to divide and conquer both factions.

But it will take a power of discipline and patience and keeping the foot soldiers in line in order to bring the final desired results. Any military general could tell you that. And they would also tell you that the longer that process goes on , the higher the chance of capitulation of some important member of the link in the chain.

And history tells us that that sort of capitulation happened all too frequently.

You have a point, and I probably should have specified that I was referring to xenophobic nationalism, but moderate nationalism is not what Labour’s playing around with. They think theirs is “nice” because it’s about reserving jobs and infrastructure for the use of kiwis, which is not in fact moderate nationalism, it is a literal “New Zealand first” policy that lies about the benefits of immigration. We may need to turn the tap down on immigration for a bit, but the plan needs to be to turn it back up in the long run, because modern New Zealand is born of immigration, and we can’t turn our backs on it, and it’s a bad idea to even try.

Now, if we were instead talking about say, a moderate Māori nationalist movement like a Māori Party that was a bit more aggressively demanding concessions about Māori language, culture, and tino rangatiratanga, I would say it potentially had a place in civilised democratic politics. But that hypothetical doesn’t mean we should put up with the genuine strands of xenophobic or even racist nationalism that is running through Labour and New Zealand First rhetoric.

I support turning down the tap on immigration right now, at least if we can’t convince more people to settle places other than Auckland. Please don’t assume that being anti-xenophobia means that I think we can exceed the limits of our infrastructure, that’s National-party BS.

This doesn’t mean that engaging in “immigrants are taking our jobs” hysteria actually makes it a case. There is no good evidence that the economy works this way, in fact all the data we have shows that historical correlations between immigration and unemployment have been negative. (but I suppose caring about the actual impact of policy makes me part of the “academic left” now even though you’ve been quite happy to agree with me in the past for several years when I made points based on actual evidence? What tall-poppy anti-intellectual nonsense, that’s the sort of shit the right are supposed to pull. If you want to call me out of touch, just say that instead) It is possible that something weird is going on and at the moment the negative correlation isn’t holding, because maybe immigrants aren’t what actually causes the boosts in employment, they may simply be closely associated with it. If we have evidence that’s the case, I’m perfectly happy to hear it, but I already agree in principle we need a bit less immigration than National have been allowing.

I also agree that we shouldn’t use immigration as a proxy for undermining working conditions like the government has. This is in fact the other main thing we should be reconsidering about immigration, is how it effects existing New Zealanders, and whether we can therefore continue to offer a quality of life for new New Zealanders that would be up to standards we consider to be acceptable if we let them in to live here.

It is totally fair to point out that huge influxes of immigrants that can wield power against the existing population can undermine the existing culture, or bring in different social norms that can require our institutions to adapt in order to prevent problems. (for instance, some immigrant communities have less awareness of domestic violence protections, not that DV isn’t a pandemic in general, but people in those communities often need to be made aware that they are entitled to call the police) Fortunately nobody is talking about that kind of influx in the future, not even the National Party with its out-of-whack immigration policies designed to undermine unions, and we are taking measures to make amends and preserve Māori heritage now, like we should have done from the beginning, which while it isn’t enough is a start, and gives us a basis to continue to make things right from.

You should also remember that the position I hold now that immigrants are beneficial to our society so long as we maintain some basic controls at our borders, and we shouldn’t be afraid to let them in when the country can hold more people, is a completely orthodox Labour and Green belief that the Greens still maintain in their current policy. Labour believed in it pretty strongly under Clark, and it’s part of the rationale for actively wanting, for instance, a higher refugee quota, and when Labour first started putting its toes into this water we were all appalled at their stupidly misaimed “chinese sounding names” debacle, that at least looked a bit like xenophobia even if you accept that it came from a place of wanting to look after kiwi interests. People are frequently needing to tell Iain Lees-Galloway, someone I had a lot of respect for, that he is being problematically xenophobic in his rhetoric now, and he’s not listening because he likes how it’s playing out electorally.

If you don’t care at all about opportunities for people overseas who also need a fair go, you’re not really a leftist, you’re just a nationalist in disguise, and immigration is one of the ways we help people get a fairer go of things around the world, by letting people move to where they would like to live if they have the resources to do so. It certainly has its issues if you don’t regulate it, but that’s not to say that it’s inherently bad.

The fact is that immigration does affect jobs. And it is mostly middle and upper classes if it is from the third world. The poor cannot afford it.

The boost to numbers in employment for the last 9 years has been way behind the number of people added.

Maybe that is not so apparent in middle class enclaves, but it is where I live.

Tell “immigration adds jobs” to:

The young Maori kids I know that couldn’t get the apprenticeships they desperately wanted, because the jobs are already taken by trained South Africans.
(Several hundred leave Northland polytech every year. Only a dozen or so get an apprenticeship).

The young Kiwis who couldn’t be trained for harbour pilots, or rail ferry jobs because there is an endless supply from the UK, Kiribati and India.

The wharf jobs in Auckland going to immigrants, because New Zealanders like to have a life. Instead of being on call 365 days of the year!

The IT training that is not offered to New Zealanders, because it is cheaper to recruit from overseas.

The endless number of zero hours, and underpaid hospitality jobs when there is 92000 unemployed youths who could do them, if wages were lifted to a level where they could afford to work.

The barns full of exploited Philipinos on Dairy farms.

Houses on the coast in Northland unoccupied for 8 months of the year owned by wealthy Americans, Chinese, Germans, Dutch and South Africans.

We are being sold out. And it is time it stopped.

New jobs that offer 10 hours a week, while expecting employees to stand by for every other hour of the week, like fruit picking, are not jobs. They are tax payer subsidized hobby’s which only those who do not pay NZ living costs can afford to do.

I agree unemployment is getting worse. I think that is largely due to other sorts of National Party economic mismanagement, (like misdirected spending and unnecessary tax cuts to the wealthy) not the immigration settings, although they’re exacerbating the effect because of the real impact the immigration settings are having.

The negative effect of the current immigrantion settings is largely that they relieve pressure on employers trying to offer unreasonable working conditions that, realistically, not even new immigrants should want, but they’re more willing to put up with than second-(or-higher-)generation New Zealanders. This puts a downward pressure on wages, which in turn lowers circulation, which in turn depresses GDP, but because in terms of the percentage of the economy that these slummy employers represent isn’t too large a chunk yet, we’re still managing to pull off some economic growth due to heroic efforts on the part of particular industries, like that milk powder boom, or huge expansion in kiwi software firms. Really the Nats are bloody lucky the Canterbury quakes happened, otherwise they wouldn’t have had the billions of dollars in the NDF to dip into as an economic stimulus to offset their moronic economic settings, and they might only have managed two terms.

You’re completely right on everything else and I wouldn’t have dreamed of contradicting any of that. I just don’t think it adds up to a reason to argue against immigrants in general, who are largely good people who want a chance to do better (or even just try something different) here in NZ, when what’s wrong are the settings that are causing worker exploitation and are now slowly sapping the momentum from the economy, and even after adjusting them there’ll still be room for a lot of the good sorts we really want in NZ, and they deserve to feel welcome when they get here, as it’s not the immigrants’ fault if National is running the economy into the ground for their mates’ benefit.

‘Liberal values’ and ‘neoliberalism’ have much in common – free speech (including speech that some luvvies might find offensive), free trade in goods and labour, freedom to cross international borders, and security in one’s private property. The use of force to change the behaviour of peaceful people is not permitted in a liberal society. Tariffs, trade barriers, restrictions on free speech, and taxation are all anathema to a liberal.

Think “liberal” like democracy, not “liberal” like classical liberalism. I’m talking about social liberalism. I think some free trade is good, (but that it needs to be handled more carefully so too-slowly increased wages in developing countries don’t cause decreased wages or decreased employment in developed countries, which in turn would cause blowback against fairer terms of trade) and I think some restrictions on free speech are necessary. (ie. incitement to murder should be illegal, and we should allow enough space in our free speech protections for private boycotts of hate speech like nazism/alt right movements)

Social freedoms like rule of law, presumption of innocence, intersectional feminism, secularism, queer equality, racial equality, general human rights, and a gradual shift towards transnationalism. (ie. globalisation between individuals rather than mediated through large institutions. The internet is an excellent example of transnationalism) Those sorts of things are what I’m referring to when I say liberalism, basically.

Neoliberalism and classical liberalism definitely want a right-wing economic policy that we don’t need and is objectively harmful. But you don’t need ironclad property rights if you live in a society where poverty is viewed the same way as violence, and where we recognise that treating all workers with dignity is actually better for society as a whole even if some individual millionaires may miss out a bit from it.

But a left-wing economic policy is insufficient for a good society. You need a liberal-democratic social policy as well, especially because left wing movements don’t succeed without the broad coalition that social liberalism brings to the table.

All these individual equal rights that a liberal democracy presumes to confer didn’t exist in the first place under a liberal democracy….why? So the state that persecuted an individual for being x. y. or z can, in a show of benevolence confer a right that it itself had with-held in the first place, and we are meant to party and we are supposed to be grateful and celebrate how enlightened and progressive that state is….why?

1. There isn’t some Central Committee of Liberalism that dictates how things are in liberal democracies. It’s a liberal democracy, ie a conservative’s opinion has the same value as mine, numbers count, and liberals like me aren’t exactly numerous.

2. For my money, people who believe in freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free markets, civil rights, democratic societies, secular governments, gender equality and international cooperation (to quote Wikipedia) are you-fucken-bet the moral superiors of people who reject those things. The “free markets” stuff may be over-rated, but the rest of it ought to be a starting point for everyone who isn’t an authoritarian scumbag.

The “free market” types believe markets should be free to the extent they have extracted the money from them.
Then the same “Liberals” want their monopolies, property and “intellectual property” protected from the rest of us. So not “Liberal”.

Because democratic liberalism is a process, not a binary. It doesn’t stop when women get the vote, for instance, it keeps going on to other marginalized social groups and other issues that were less urgent or simply less prioritized. It is the process of personal growth to realize that most types of social freedom aren’t harmful, and that you can trust and rely on other human beings to act as positive parts of society even when we all give each other our freedom.

And no, we are not supposed to be grateful or celebrate how progressive or enlightened we are. The state granting us our rights isn’t an achievement for the state, it’s an achievement in personal growth for the people who were not actually affected by the issue but decided to trust in those that are that they would be responsible with their freedoms. It isn’t the gay man who’s been dignified when we grant him his rights, it’s the straight people who conceded them who have grown.

It’s self-congratulatory bullshit to idolise the state for “granting” human rights- they aren’t granted, they’re demanded by the people, and sometimes they succeed in enshrining them in law. We’re supposed to be relieved that we’ve finally caught up on specific issues and are able to put the coercive suffering that conservative overreach can cause behind us, and to keep fighting to make the world better for the things we haven’t caught up on yet. And putting that progress at risk when you’re not one of the people who would potentially suffer is at best selfish, and at worst morally contemptible. It isn’t the place of white people to say “if we vote in a nationalist it might not harm you” to everyone else who is potentially at risk. They are far more accurate judges of what the harm to them would be, and we should trust them if they say that they need social liberalism in their leader.

The purpose of liberalism is to identify harmful social barriers in society and push them down, and to fight tyranny. The purpose of conservatism is to slow down liberalism enough so that it doesn’t suffer backlash, and to identify those social barriers that actually do serve a genuine purpose and protect them from liberal over-reach. Conservatives have a place in a balanced political framework, but they need to realize it’s a defensive one, not an offensive one. Milt’s point is also valid around why liberalism hasn’t won everything immediately: It has to win the argument against conservatism on each social issue it brings up, so the very nature of adversarial politics ensures that issues have to be fought one-by-one.

There’s also the fact that as technology changes and society evolves, old issues face new complications that liberalism needs to address. Feminism might have made a lot of advances for instance, but now women have to face things like cyberstalking, doxxing, photo leaks, revenge porn, and so on. Liberalism in general and feminism in particular couldn’t solve these issues before because they didn’t exist prior to the popularisation of the internet, and because of changing technology and social norms, liberalism inherently has moving goalposts.

I suspect the first thing that comes to your mind is some hippy related stuff, but free love was a demand of Spanish anarchists during the civil war that denied the authority of the state or the church to determine legitimate relationships.

And here we are some 90 years on from then and the church and state in NZ still determines legitimacy and even extends that legitimacy through the draughting of same sex marriage legislation etc.

And that extension of authority was regarded as a good thing in quite a few quarters.

Which is the price to be paid in support of mythical liberal notions of progress I suppose.

Sometimes liberals get it wrong too and overreach, no political ideology is perfectly correct because there are at least some useful values in all of them, or at least all of the ones actually based on values. The state has a valid role in recognizing official relationships, so long as it does so without discrimination. It’s made progress on that one, but I think there’s still some further liberalizing to go in terms of polyamory, and instead of free love we’ve had better laws protecting people in defacto relationships and successfully eliminated some of the stigma around being deliberately single.

I don’t regard progress as mythical, but I do think we’re not always correct ahead of time on where we think progress can and should go. Back in the day we thought technological progress should be flying cars, but now we have the internet and I think most of us prefer that. Social progress is likely to have the same sort of divergence happen, and eventually we might reach a point where all avenues of future “progress” really are counterproductive. We should want liberal progress where it actually helps people, not because we believe that being more liberal is always more correct.

Is it anything besides a political construct that facilitates the exercise of unilateral control over a given geographical area and a moral authority over people? Assuming it’s not much else besides that, how can it be viewed as legitimate or valid?

Before I address your question, I’ll quickly say that I still think you may be misunderstanding what I’m talking about a little in the direction you’re taking with this discussion. My point is that we shouldn’t throw the baby of social liberalism out with the bathwater of right-wing economic policy in our shared aim to embarass and defeat neoliberals, and we should be aiming towards a soildarity-based liberal-left coalition of enviro-socialists in the long run. You know, basically something like the current Green Party or older Labour Party in New Zealand, but aiming eventually to socialise programs where practical and disestablish personal currency when we’re able to meet people’s basic needs without it, a point even New Zealand is fast approaching. I’m not some sort of radical left-libertarian anarchist who wants to smash government just because I think it’s a good rule of thumb that the government should leave people alone on social issues where nobody’s human rights are being violated, rather I just know as a bisexual man that intersectional liberalism married with leftism is the only way to guarantee the rights of people like me and people whose lives I care about.

But going back to the premise of the OP, I also accept that while neoliberals are bad, I would rank them ahead of right-wing nationalists in terms of political movements I can deal with. I totally understand the desire to smash the elite establishment, but we should be doing so with left-wing populists, not right-wing ones, and we should be careful about throwing away everything the establishment supports just because, because some of it is actually good for us. If I were voting in France, I would try to elect a genuinely left-wing Parliament rather than voting in Macron’s neoliberal stooges, (I think that’s the most important part of the election, actually, but it looks like he’s going to get his backers in Parliament as well as win the Presidency if the polling is accurate, and unlike the US there’s no electoral college to throw off polling) but I would be voting for Macron as President because I think the EU is a good idea and that it has been effective in protecting people’s rights and promoting peace and prosperity accross Europe, mostly, even if it has a lot of problems to sort out and its bankers need to be put firmly in their places, and because I think Le Pen is dangerously close to being a Nazi, and one Nazi in power is one too many, even if she couldn’t appoint anyone she really liked as Prime Minister due to the fact that Parliament would just vote them back out again.

I don’t know whether that will clear things up or not, but if it does, great. If not, on to your question.

The concept of a state is valid and reasonable because we vote for it as citizens and we give it the legitimacy to represent us, and we’re not having some sort of civil war to overthrow it or anything. In theory in a democracy, the state is us, it’s how we make decisions on a scale that’s too large for everyone to vote directly on, and how we administer and executive those laws and give them direction, because good luck overseeing any sort of necessary bureaucracy for national programs through direct democracy with no formal leaders or representatives. 🙂

As long as the state remains accountable to the people, (both through voting occuring and in the broad trend passing laws that enjoy public support) follows its own constitutional norms, and has an effective media safeguard present, it’s a legitimate democracy.

At the very least, we need a state to mediate in cases where people’s freedoms would interfere with each other, or would constitute violence, or create practical problems that need to be solved before they can be realised, or to allow us to collectively fund programs that ensure economic opportunity, that address past wrongs, that develop infrastructure too expensive to fund privately, or simply improve quality of life. Because states are a reality, we also need to be a state in order to have that political machinery work together with other states on our behalf, too, although I realise there’s a certain circularity to that particular argument.

If technology or changing societal norms address some or all of those reasons, we can always rethink the idea a state, what it should be, or even if we really need one. (I imagine that if we manage to sort out global warming in time, that national governments may eventually become less powerful in the future as political ideologies begin to converge on what works. Maybe. But that relies on ordinary human beings becoming harder to fool. We’ll see if that’s actually the case) But right now questioning the idea of a state seems stupid to me.

Going to ‘bullet point’ this as much as I can for the sake of brevity. Hopefully you can follow which parts of your comment the following is relating to….

What makes you think that virtue resides only within the realms of social liberalism?

How effective can a liberal/progressive ‘coalition’ ever be when it’s a marriage between incrementalists and radicals? (It becomes a one way street of support that defaults to the conservative and of the spectrum)

I think we’d probably agree that some socially democratic focused government is the realistic short term goal. (Medium and long term we probably diverge)

I am a left libertarian anarchist, but I don’t want to smash a damned thing – just usurp some shit 😉

No rights or tolerances or understandings can ever be guaranteed. I’d suggest they are more secure with more immediate and empowering social and governing structures than they are under remote ones though. You going to ‘fuck over’ any of the people you are constantly working through day to day and important decisions with on the basis they are ‘different’? I think not.

On the OP. Left wing populism versus right wing populism – we agree.

Work to elect a genuinely (we’re only talking social democratic) left wing National Assembly? Absolutely.

I don’t share your view of the EU. It should (ideally) have been a social union but was always principally an economic one that has (now) largely divested itself of the trappings of even notional democracy.

I never gave anyone the right to represent me and I never gave permission for control of the commons to pass into the hands of selective groupings who then govern them by rules I had, and have no meaningful input to.

Meaningful democracy isn’t about direct votes, but that’s maybe for another day. On scale and complexity, aside from human affairs, I struggle to think of a single example from the world around me where complexity and scale is imposed from above. Everywhere I look it appears to ‘self generate’ from fairly simple initial conditions – ie, it’s a bottom up dynamic.

The state is not accountable, there is no ‘fourth estate’ (never was) and representative democracy is an entirely hollowed out, fairly ugly and utterly meaningless caricature of democracy.

Why cede authority or over-sight to an external agency again? If we’re incapable of individually and collectively managing our affairs then not a one of us, surely, is capable of managing the affairs of many disempowered others.

Sans a state, our infra-structure, much of it probably by necessity decentralised, may well have been much, much smarter, better and resilient than what we have.

AGW. We have not dealt with it. We had the chance and chose (or rather ‘our betters’ chose) to do not a damned thing.

I don’t think social liberals are inescapably right all the time. But off the top of my head, I can’t think of any time we’ve succeeded in getting a policy in that has later proven to be unadjustably wrong, either. (Hell, I’m struggling to think of a genuinely liberal idea that has succeeded in being implemented and then actually “gone bad” in a way that isn’t basically conservative propaganda, like their irrational dislike for no-fault divorce) My bias is in favour of liberal social policies because evidence shows they work, and because once people have the necessities of life, it’s reasonable to let them decide their own direction so long as that doesn’t hurt anyone else.

As for gradualists- are you talking about liberals or leftists? I suspect you mean liberals, but either way, but IMO there’s both gradualists and radicals in each ideology. If you’re saying you don’t think social liberals do radical, I’d question how you’re defining that term, because most recent radical change we study in the history books was of the social kind, not the economic kind. We balance the speed of reform so that the gradualists don’t get whiplash but the radicals don’t get impatient wherever possible, but inevitably extreme outliers in either direction will be unhappy. This is part of why governments change every once in a while even when they’re objectively successful- coalitions just don’t stay together forever without change, and the inertia of being in government often frustrates people with its pace, and prevents the change in perspective (or in fresh faces!) needed to maintain popular support.

Usurping some shit could be a good idea theoretically, depending on what you mean, lol.

I agree that it’s ideal in the long-term to devolve most powers to a local level so long as there’s a solid framework in place that guarantees basic rights to people of all localities and stops the problem of people being asked to get out if they don’t like the local laws when all they want is their human rights respected. (ie. nobody should allowed to be the taliban just because we devolve more power to local authorities) I don’t think that will eliminate the need for higher authorities, but I do think if things go well we might see more nations becoming something like states of super-national entities like the EU, and therefore national politics diminishing in importance as they become less relevant in powers either being devolved downwards or delegated upwards, so it might start looking a little more like anarchy in the long run even if we don’t call it that.

I’m pretty sure we actually agree on what’s wrong with the EU, I just want to see it reformed into a democracy on the EU level without any more key national departures actually going through. If France or Germany leave, the EU is done, and it may never come back, even though I think something like it, but more sustainable, is necessary for world peace and stability.

AGW is what really worries me right now, it is the #1 concern and it’s infuriating that we can’t get all of the left to agree to take it as seriously as we need to, and that so many nations have elected right-wing idiots that are going to make the problem worse. If we manage to limit things to at most a 2°C temperature rise, then we can handle everything else IMO. If it goes over that, I honestly don’t know what will happen. Trump is probably the most unhelpful development in this regard and if he ever gets over his incompetence he could end up screwing the whole project over. Fortunately right now all they’ve managed is a 1% cut to the EPA, which is still bad, but not as disastrous as it could be.

For me, the issue with authority was always the other way around- I chafe under mismanagement, so I need someone really competent in charge to respect authority, but even incompetent leaders tend to like me, at least until they know I think they’re incompetent anyway. 😉 Maybe that’s down to perfectionism, who knows. But that’s a big part of why I think that being cautious with interfering in social policy is a good idea for governments- because it’s hard to mismanage things you don’t touch, and the stuff they really need to touch either way is in fighting economic inequality.

And web based discussion isn’t colourful or dynamic enough for either of us to do much other than restate our respective broad positions in endless, uninterrupted screeds of writing in wee boxes – it doesn’t exactly lend itself to the important subtleties that are a part of verbal exchanges.

There is essentially no difference between liberalism and neo-liberalism. If you believe that there is, then you’d have to list or name those essential differences. The term ‘neo-liberal’ was simply coined to indicate a resurgence of liberal ideology during the 1970s. (From the end of WW2 until then, it had been somewhat blunted or subsumed by the emergence of social democracy as a western norm)

Something that confuses me somewhat is that most liberals I know would condemn the attempts of Christianity to “save the heathen” and the ‘universality’ that project presumed.

Yet liberalism is not much else but a secular expression of that same project, but one where ‘one way’ has replaced ‘one God’. And it’s not particularly democratic and it doesn’t promote equality and it doesn’t, as claimed, offer liberty.

By the way, Macron should win the French run-off, and deservedly so. His main flaw is an indecisiveness on dealing with the increasing Islamisation of France. Islam and Sharia law are incompatible with Western liberal values, as Germany and France have found.

Conservative Islam is incompatible with liberal democratic values, the same way conservative Christianity is too, as the USA has found. And let’s not even get started on conservative Judaism in Israel and in enclaves elsewhere.

Picking specifically on Islam is silly. All conservative religious groups have the same problem, and it’s unfair to moderate and liberal religious group bearing the same name who are perfectly capable of being productive and valued members of society.

And the fact that I as an atheist have to be the one explaining this to people makes it even more silly, because I think in the long run everyone would be better off if they (voluntarily!) shed even the liberal religious beliefs, but I know trying to force them to change makes things even worse. Part of the reason France has a problem with Muslims because France is not a secular nation anymore, (and therefore not really a liberal democracy) and persecutes signs of Islamic faith. If Muslims can’t trust the French government and french laws to broker fairly for them, of course they’re going to turn to other answers, like more radical sects and Sharia. (which, incidentally, should not be called “Sharia Law” for the same reason you shouldn’t refer to “ATM machines.” My understanding is that it’s essentially just Arabic for “law”)

1 ) ‘ Part of the reason France has a problem with Muslims because France is not a secular nation anymore’
………………………………………………………………

Soooo,… hang on a minute ,…

France is NOT a secular society anymore?… if so , what is it?
……………………………………………………………….

2 ) ‘ If Muslims can’t trust the French government and french laws to broker fairly for them, of course they’re going to turn to other answers, like more radical sects and Sharia. ‘

……………………………………………………………….

Hang on a minute , mate ,… are we talking France or a middle eastern country ?

And if its France , – then don’t they as a sovereign nation state get to say what goes on in their neck of the woods?

……………………………………………………………….

I’m not so sure I like the way this is leading up to,… a sovereign state is just that . Which includes Customary laws and and ( hopefully ) a democratically elected govt that serves the will of the people that elected it. If a religious group doesn’t like that – they are under NO OBLIGATION to continue living there.

A secular society is the compromise between atheism and every religion, where the religions each get their freedom to worship in any way that doesn’t impact the human rights of others, and the atheists and the minority religions get assurances that more influential religions can’t form a cultural coalition and seize control of the state, and can’t succeed in persecuting other religions without facing the consequences of the law. A secular nation does not ban the symbols of a particular religion but leave the symbols of others intact. It doesn’t pick and choose who is dangerous based on their affiliations but rather based on their actions.

France has left behind secular values in its haste to fight Islam, seeing it as some sort of cultural threat. Muslims aren’t inherently dangerous, just like Christians and Jews aren’t, or any other religion for that matter. Terrorists are dangerous, but not all muslims are terrorists. In banning traditional Muslim attire without any good reason, France may still be a democracy, but it’s no longer a secular democracy. It has accepted that it can oppress the reasonable rights of certain religions without an objective reason in law.

France can absolutely decide to abandon secularism. But it doesn’t get to talk about how it is a tolerant liberal democracy anymore, and it should arguably be facing consequences in the EU courts for doing so, given the EU’s law requires secularism of member states. Secularism is an inherent part of the mix that makes a liberal democracy, the same way human rights for any other group are.

I was initially going to make a comment about Syria and its secularism in relation to that, alongside noting the support afforded by western liberal regimes (including France) to religious elements within Syria that want to overthrow the state and suppress other religions.

But instead I got to thinking about Switzerland and how it banned the construction of minarets. And that flowed to more general and widespread thoughts on just how intolerable and hollow liberalism’s “all equal before the law” claims are when regarded against the fact that all social indicators point to deep systemic bias against….well, anyone not quite fitting the image of “successful liberal” really.

I actually agree with you that that kind of “liberalism” isn’t liberal. Liberals have to be on the side of minorities, especially when that minority is “people who are poor and unsuccessful.” It is part of why liberals and leftists have traditionally been allied movements, just like conservatives and right-wingers. Sometimes you get the odd mix of liberal right-wingers or conservative leftists, but not often. (we get a fair amount of liberal right-wingers in NZ in general and the National Party as a result because the consensus around liberal values is part of our national identity, but that’s because a sort of relaxed, often rural liberalism is so strong here, not because right-wing liberals are a common phenomenon in general. Think Jim Bolger, John Key, etc…)

And yeah, we need to be really careful about supporting religious groups in wars because it can cause so many unpredictable problems in the future. Al Quaeda and ISIS are great examples.

Neoliberals and other liberals obsessed with cults of urbanisation and economic success are, imo, traitors to liberal democratic values in the same way conservatives can be “class-traitors” to their own interests when they vote for right-wing policies due to conservative wedge issues. You can’t have successful liberalism without economic leftism, and you can’t have successful class politics without liberal politics. I would go so far as to say that this was one of the fundamental errors of the Soviet Union, in fact. (not the largest one though, obviously) I just think the correct way to fight this sort of hypocrisy is by insisting on genuine liberal values, rather than by abandoning them altogether.

S’okay. I’ve never considered myself as being a liberal. In previous exchanges (with Weka) I’ve said that, yes, insofar as social liberalism is concerned, I hold what many would take to be liberal values. (Broadly speaking a “live and let live” attitude.)

Liberals have to be on the side of minorities, especially when…

And straight off the bat, I ask myself – Why are there ‘sides’ and why are there ‘minorities’ and where does this notion that liberals get to play arbiter come from and why would they want that position to exist?

Rewinding sideways a wee bit, my main beef with political liberals is that they are addicted to reform and resistant to systemic change (maybe that’s a basic ‘rule of thumb’ difference between a liberal and a progressive) – so systemic inequity persists on the back of notions about the essential or innate goodness of liberalism…even though liberal structures produce ‘sides’ and ‘minorities’ and the space for ‘a referee’.

I also don’t place my political world view within the ‘playing field’ of states and nations (in the liberal sense of those entities and the authority invested in them) but see those things as having to be dismantled or supplanted if we’re ever going to get a shot at collective and individual freedom.

I also don’t buy into the notion of progress which, as far as I’m aware, is pretty central to liberal thinking. I live for “however long”. I won’t be around forever and I won’t be coming back from some ‘beyond’. Whatever there is that is possible has to be realisable in the present, or it’s no better than a “just desserts in heaven” story line.

That doesn’t mean that everything I do must yield results in my life time.

It’s perfectly reasonable for me to plant fruit trees or lay in whatever other works there may be that will not come to fruition before my death – and that will only benefit people I will never know. But we’re talking physical works – certainly not anything that would add to a tradition (as in a world view) that could then become a barrier to future generations exploring the possibilities inherent to dynamic endless change.

On economics (as in systems of production and distribution I’d position myself as a market abolitionist. It never fails to amaze me how many people think that means an end to production and trade. Kind of scary to think we’re so inured to something that we think of it being completely natural and all that is possible…

Conservative Islam is incompatible with liberal democratic values, the same way conservative Christianity is too, as the USA has found.

Not in the same way at all. Punishment for blasphemy and apostasy isn’t “conservative Islam,” it’s just “Islam.” It’s quite specific in that respect. You can say that in practical terms there’s no difference because Christians have also punished blasphemy and apostasy, but there’s nothing inherent in Christianity that prescribes punishment for those things and democracies have managed to suppress Christians’ ability to apply those punishments without needing to oppose Christianity itself. Any government that suppresses Muslims’ ability to punish blasphemy and apostasy is in opposition to Islam itself and will be opposed by those who actually believe the bullshit.

To imply that Christians only read the new testament is a very biased (rascist) analysis of religion. All conservative Christians take the old testament to heart and with all its very strong and jealous god who is vengeful and violent to those who oppose

To imply that Christians only read the new testament is a very biased (rascist) analysis of religion.

1. Didn’t imply any such thing. However, there isn’t any dispute within Xtian theology about JC declaring a new Covenant that replaces the Jewish one, declaring that he who is without sin gets to cast the first stone etc.

2. Racism is a cheap shot for people who can’t address the actual argument. Naturally you fall back on it.

I guess that explains why the most aggresive nation that has been responsible for the most death and destruction since the second world war is also the most conservative Christian nation. Thet took on board all the bits except the values of Jesus. Funny that they should be readers of the bible rather than the koran. Hence the bit about racism. The facts dont fit the picture you paint

Abstract may be all good fun for you but when you let your mask slip and your disdain and outright malice for others who dont fit your world view comes through it needs to be called in much the same way as you say Le Pen needs to be called. Attempts to belittle me dont change that

You are proceeding from an incorrect premise. There are liberal Muslims who believe that punishment for blasphemy and apostasy is wrong. They might not yet be as strong a group as in some other religions, but that is because Islamic people have been oppressed more recently than, say, Christians. If the oppression stops, then the liberal religious values are likely to spread. Literally every Muslim I have ever met personally and had a reasonable chance to ask about those issues is in this group, so I’m not sure how you can say with a straight face that they don’t exist. I know they exist, I have met them, and I have heard them vociferously support peace and human rights even where it contradicts reasonable interpretations of their religious text. These are the sort of people we should want in our society, and as an atheist, I consider them better allies than fellow atheists who would categorically attack entire religions, because they have credibility in talking around conservative Muslims to a nonviolent viewpoint that I would not.

You are advocating views that would cause a backlash that would worsen the very problem you want to solve.

I agree that their book says what it says. I agree people that take that book literally, (at least for the problematic sections) and advocate unwavering literal adherance are conservative Muslims, and that they present a problem to democratic society. I don’t agree that any degree of conservatism in interpretation automatically makes a Muslim dangerous however. If they believe that they can’t or shouldn’t act as the Qur’an tells them to when it advocates violence, then they should be a welcome part of liberal democratic society. We have the same concerns, I just think your strategy is wrong, and it fails to see liberal Islam as the reformist ally it can be.

You don’t eliminate false beliefs by screaming about how wrong they are at the top of your lungs all the time. Sometimes that sort of direct opposition is tactically necessary in certain situations because you have to save someone else. But in terms of convincing people they’re wrong, it’s counterproductive. You convince them by being a good neighbour and friend and modelling better values, by not questioning their beliefs unless implicitly or explicitly invited to, and by letting people keep or even providing reasonable accomodation for any beliefs that don’t challenge human rights without being judgemental about it.

(And yes, I think all religions contain false beliefs, and the true beliefs they contain are still problematic because they’re believed for the wrong reason, which also leads to false beliefs. Ideally I’d like people to believe things that are true and believe for true reasons as much as possible, but I accept that the universality of both those ideas is impractical in reality, and thus there will always be religion, or woo, or pseudoscience. That’s okay so long as we progressively limit their harmful influences over time)

On Christianity:

You are simply incorrect to say there is nothing inherent in Christianity that opposes liberal democratic values, and are trying to move the goalposts specifically to the flaws of Islam rather than acknowledging that there are equally flawed, but different beliefs in conservative Christianity. A generous interpretation of the New Testament from a liberal Christian will of course be compatible. But not all Christians are liberal. You’re going to tell me that the beliefs of Destiny Church are compatible with liberal democracy? Because they’re just not, nobody acting in good faith and understanding liberal democracy could say so. Stop focusing on Islam and realise that all religions share the same problem, it’s simply that some are associated with people who have more factors that lead them to a conservative interpretation. The problem is the confluence of conservatism, religious literalism, and the ability to condone violence or break laws.

It’s also worth noting that not every Christian ignores the Old Testament the same way theologians would, as the typical objection to some of the odious parts of Christianity is that they’re contradicted by the New Testament, which supercedes the old in Christian doctrine. However it’s very common that people pick and choose the parts of each book that they follow, and misinterpret or ignore the parts that contradict their interpretation, while being very literal about the parts they like. (This is because all people get their values the same way, and it’s not usually from being instructed in them from a book, rather it is from people they trust modelling them) This isn’t a problem when the parts they like tell them to be good and decent people, of course, but it is when they talk about repressing or punishing lust, (not usually a harmful part of human nature) or hating sin, (which includes self-hatred and guilt) or tolerating slavery, or use language that (perhaps merely from symbolism, perhaps not) suggests white supremacy. And those are all from the top of my head. If I felt like going on a digging expedition, I’m sure I would find many more problematic memes within the bible, and be able to link them to groups that actually believe in them in culturally Christian democracies like New Zealand or the United States. Predominantly white religions aren’t any better than the predominantly brown ones, yet coincidentally it’s always the predominantly brown ones that get treated less fairly.

Matthew. I take it you’re aware you’re addressing your comments to a person who, if their other comments on Islam hereabouts are anything to go by, is a deeply toxic bigot? Don’t expect any sensible or reasonable response from them is all I’m saying.

There are liberal Muslims who believe that punishment for blasphemy and apostasy is wrong.

Of course there are. I’ve met plenty of them myself. However, their understandable decision to ignore the fact that their religion declares blasphemy and apostasy crimes that deserve punishment doesn’t alter the fact that their religion declares blasphemy and apostasy crimes that deserve punishment.

You are advocating views that would cause a backlash that would worsen the very problem you want to solve.

Special pleading. Facts remain facts regardless of any unpleasant effects you might fear from people knowing them.

You convince them by being a good neighbour and friend and modelling better values…

This being pretty much the exact opposite of the approach you were advocating when some right-wingers tried to set up a dubious White Pride club at UoA.

A generous interpretation of the New Testament from a liberal Christian will of course be compatible. But not all Christians are liberal.

So what? As mentioned above, whether or not people are liberal has little to do with their religion – they ignore or emphasise things dependent on their political outlook. My comment is about what’s in the religious ideology itself, not how individuals choose to manipulate it in their own interests.

* I’m glad we agree on the existence of liberal muslims who don’t believe in the things you are specifically concerned about. It’s rather confusing that you still insist that there’s any relevance to lumping all of Islam together still when you’ve conceded that the beliefs that you claim are your reason for opposing Islam are not universal within Islam. You’ve essentially gone from “All Muslims are problematic” to “Some Muslims are problematic” in this concession, which is what I claimed all along, and even if I expect that the “some” group is smaller for me than it is for you, you haven’t given any specifics I disagree with yet. You can’t go back to the words of the Qur’an to undo your admission that your premise is invalid, because the liberal Muslims whose existence you’ve conceded to now admit themselves they do not follow every word of the Qur’an literally, therefore the presence of those words is not necessarily relevant. I fail to see any way to a winning argument for your position from here without any identified universal problematic beliefs within Islam, and you’ve already pulled out your big guns there.

* Backlash isn’t special pleading, it’s a known social phenomenon, and it’s not an “exception to a rule,” it’s the reality that if you try to oppose all Muslims rather than the ones that are actually believing in problematic things, you make the most problematic beliefs more prevalent because the hatred caused by mistreatment makes them more sympathetic to extreme interpretations of their beliefs. I can’t even figure out why you’re citing the special pleading fallacy here at all tbqh, as it essentially relies on you pointing an exception that has no relevant relation to the matter at hand. The only exception I’m making is that some people don’t believe the things that YOU identified as the problematic aspects of Islam, (for the sake of simplicity I am referring to these people as liberal religious believers, but I acknowledge in reality it’s a little more complex than that, with unproblematic beliefs being mostly distributed among liberal believers, somewhat among moderates, and occassionally among conservatives, and the reverse distribution for the problematic ones. I’d be very surprised if the distinction wasn’t relevant on a statistical level) which is only irrelevant if you were lying about the reason you find it problematic.

* I was talking about liberal Muslims at that point, not conservative Muslims, and I don’t advocate we organize private boycotts of or deny speaking platforms to liberal Christians either, which would therefore be the inconsistency you would be looking for, rather than Nazis, which are pretty conservative as people claiming to be Christians go. I don’t know if I was unclear or not about that, but I’m pretty careful about inconsistencies in my worldview, and when I catch them, I make a decision as to which rule is better and admit I was wrong about the one I decided against, assuming such an inconsistency actually exists, of course. You might not like that for me the relevant factor is how seriously they take their religion and how willing they are to force their beliefs on other people, but it’s perfectly consistent for me to base my decisions on that factor ahead of what the religious text actually says, especially as I ignore some pretty horrific things in the texts of Jews and Christians under the exist same rationale, and you aren’t calling for them to be kicked out of the country.

Nazis and people who want to stone apostates belong in the same category of people who need to be denied private platforms to speak whenever we can manage it, as I told you in the comments of that post when you took issue with me lumping white extremists like Nazis in with other terrorists in terms of shutting down their rhetoric. In terms of actually changing the mind of conservative Muslims, like with conservative Christians, you generally need someone within their religion to do it, and it generally has to be someone they respect. It’s hard to swing that if you’ve alienated all the liberal and moderate religious figures by opposing the whole lot like you advocate, as sometimes some of them have said enough things the conservative groups like that they can have some sway. Hell, some of the conservative religious people don’t approve of violence either, and will help in preventing it, too, even if they’re a problem on other social policy. And if we can’t change their minds, then yes, we may need to imprison violent people or engage in counter-terrorism as evidence suggests it’s necessary. But it’s much better to try and change their minds before they hurt anyone, or have any influence with their hateful ideologies, and to do that, we need allies in their communities whose freedoms we have genuinely protected, and who feel we are being respectful when we ask for their help.

* You are incorrect in claiming that religions are completely defined by their holy text when they have one, although I agree it’s not completely irrelevant, the style of interpretation followed is arguably just as important as the actual words used. As a writer, I can say quite definitively that the same set of words can have several different interpretations even when you think you’ve been perfectly clear, and this is with modern language that’s well-understood purely due to synonyms. We’re dealing with ancient texts that are often translations of translations and copies of copies, so the meaning is so variable between the original and the interpretations that sometimes the differences taken as a whole are unrecognizable.

As such, religions splinter like glass when you drill into them. It’s very rare that two believers actually interpret the meaning of a text as a whole in exactly the same configuration of ways with no slight variations, even when they agree on the overarching theme. At least, not if you get them down to specifics. But religions avoid this problem in three ways- by convincing people back to orthodoxy where a divergence in values is considered critical, by purging heretics when that fails, (causing a split if the purging either isn’t with deadly force or isn’t successful, and the heresy manages to persist) or by simply encouraging communication of values in a way that’s so vague it doesn’t tell you anything meaningful, with words like “spiritual.” If religions simply followed the text literally at all times, it would be difficult to have as many religious sects as we do.

The political outlook of religious believers is formed by the same values that determine whether they interpret their religion in a liberal, conservative, or moderate fashion, (you don’t meet many people who like stoning apostates who are willing to admit the Qur’an isn’t the literal word of God, for instance) and there is absolutely relevant interplay between those values. None of the problems you have identified with Islam are practiced by liberal Muslims, and there are many problematic interpretations of Christianity that would be just as bad when paired with a person that doesn’t value non-violence, as we see with many so-called “lone wolf” right-wing terrorist attacks in the USA.

It’s rather confusing that you still insist that there’s any relevance to lumping all of Islam together still when you’ve conceded that the beliefs that you claim are your reason for opposing Islam are not universal within Islam.

It’s only confusing because you don’t distinguish between assessing an ideology and assessing individuals who follow the ideology. I’m arguing that a religious ideology that, for example, prescribes punishments for blasphemy and apostasy is patently an illiberal one. Your counter-argument that there are liberal followers of that ideology who don’t believe the illiberal bits is irrelevant – the ideology itself is illiberal. How we relate to and behave towards other people is a separate subject.

Re backlash, you’re arguing that we shouldn’t consider this particular illiberal ideology in the same category as others because it might encourage racists. To me, that’s special pleading. It’s also appeal to emotion, but I think the special pleading is more significant.

Liberals shouldn’t be trying to deny anyone a platform to speak unless they’re advocating or inciting violence. Actual Nazis and some Muslim preachers fall into that category, students whose opinions you dislike don’t.

You are incorrect in claiming that religions are completely defined by their holy text when they have one…

You have to assess an ideology on some basis, and what’s written in its basic texts and believed by most of its followers is a good place to start. Fascism and communism also have wide ranges of interpretations by different people, but that doesn’t alter the fact that they’re illiberal ideologies.

Re political outlook, I’ve lived in a Muslim country and visited others, and I can tell you that you that liberalism is not a feature of Muslim societies, regardless of any Muslims you might have met here. That isn’t a coincidence.

Ideologies aren’t in themselves dangerous. What is dangerous is the individual beliefs they’re composed of, why people believe them, (because a problematic reason for a benign belief can lead to a problematic belief elsewhere) and how serious they are about it. In the case of liberal religious groups, both the “why?” and “how serious?” questions generally have benign answers for almost every issue you ask them about, and yes, “even” in the case of Islam, and those are the critical questions in determining if someone will oppose democratic norms.

The issue with religions is that they’re not like political ideologies where people gather around relatively clearly-defined beliefs. Religions are ill-defined beliefs that accept broad ranges of people with broad ranges of ill-defined interpretations of that belief. You can’t clump them together in the same way you can, say, the ACT party. (hell, not even all political parties can be clumped together into a single coherent ideology. If you define a political party as requiring that, National is more like a coalition of two or three different parties, as is Labour)

I am done engaging you on Nazis, especially as I have adequately refuted your objections elsewhere. This post is not about your particular issues with my positions there, and you’re clearly not engaging in an actual relevant discussion to this post on that issue, you just think you’ve found an inconsistency in my liberalism when you clearly don’t even understand why I’m a liberal, or the order I actually prioritise my beliefs in. (I’ll give you a hint: liberal isn’t at the top, and neither is leftist) If people want to see me smack you down about Nazis too, they can go find the relevant guest post in the archives. (“There Are No Fascists In New Zealand”)

You are also refusing to acknowledge that other religions have ideologies that are every bit as violent as the ones you object to in Islam. Judaism told its followers to kill all their male non-believing neighbours and force-marry (ie. imprison and rape if they do not consent) their daughters. (and of course, some Christians by extension support that, because they’re not all of them disregard the Old Testament/Torah) Christianity officially tolerates slavery, its adherents invented “just war theory,” declared the Crusades, (which is objectively every bit as bad as conservative Christians find the concept of war as Jihad) and even within the religion, Protestants have called for genocide of Catholics, and Catholics spawned the Inquisition. (a historical precedent perhaps for what you want to do to Muslims? You tell me) If we looked selectively at the violent acts of some Christians, we would be just as justified in oppressing Christians as you think you are for oppressing Muslims, but in reality we have no real justification for either.

What has quietened down this violent ideology over time is the addressing of historical grievances, closer international relations between Christian and Jewish nations, and influence of liberal religious institutions who you refuse to give any credit in the case of Islam. Yes, the base ideology is problematic. We agree on that. But I am quite happy for people to call themselves “Muslims” or “Christians” or “Jews” or anything else so long as they don’t actually believe or act on the bad parts, and because most religious groups in New Zealand are the reformed types, I am happy to give them all the benefit of the doubt until contrary evidence emerges. Islamic violence is often caused by grievance, economic inequality, and oppression, not by Islam per se, and if you really want to solve the problems some Muslims have with democratic nations with Christian heritage, you should maybe be considering addressing their grievances and ensuring their nations get a fair share of economic development rather than simply going after security theater policies that don’t make you any safer, and sometimes actively make the violence more likely by creating additional grievances.

Finally, even if all of Islam were problematic, (which you have clearly agreed it is not, despite your protestations that someone’s favourite words are somehow more powerful and predictive than their past thoughts or actions, which anyone who understands the value of behavioural profiling will tell you is a stupid premise) you also refuse to realize that in wanting to isolate Muslims as inherently dangerous and keep them out of NZ, you are proposing a form of religious McCarthyism, or a Committee on UnChristian Activities, and that it’s better not to go there for obvious reasons.

In my experience, declaring yourself the winner of a debate isn’t a good guide to who made the most sense.

…in wanting to isolate Muslims as inherently dangerous and keep them out of NZ…

You seem to be arguing with someone else there. I’ve never suggested that, on the basis that it would be both illiberal and infeasible. Please restrict yourself to what I actually argue, not what you’d prefer I was arguing because it’s easier to refute.

You don’t seem to grasp how Islam is different from other religions (except Judaism, but Judaism doesn’t assign itself the prerogative of worldwide hegemony). It isn’t so much a religion as a totalitarian system, in which you submit yourself to the will of Allah, as expressed in a very lengthy list of do-this and don’t-do-that. Few other religions are a totalitarian system in that respect, and for that reason, few other religions are as toxic to liberalism as Islam is. It’s great that some of its adherents are ignoring the bits they find inconvenient, but that doesn’t alter the fact that, as an ideology, it’s fundamentally illiberal. A Buddhist, Hindu or Christian can come up with all manner of evil to match anything a Muslim can come up with, but there’s usually nothing inherent in their religion that demands it. Islam is illiberal when used as instructed, which is the problem. We should treat individual people as individual people, but ideologies aren’t people. In short: respect Muslims, but don’t respect Islam.

The problem is that liberalism is elitist as is fascism. For both power is for sale and leading doesnt in any way involve service to people. This means that liberal media will always prefer a straight contest between liberalism and fascism rather than giviing true socialism a voice. Both will attack the socialist voice first before resuming their own contest. You can see how close they are by looking at trump in usa. The liberal and mainstream media all put away their knives and went gaga for trump when he fired missiles at Syria. Same in France. Le Pen and Macron are closer than you think. Austerity wont be a lot more fun than racism and in fact includes racism. The lesser evil argument is fallacious because it always assumes you can make the correct choice and any way after enough iterations the distinction is pretty meaningless.

‘ The problem is that liberalism is elitist as is fascism. For both power is for sale and leading doesnt in any way involve service to people. This means that liberal media will always prefer a straight contest between liberalism and fascism rather than giviing true socialism a voice. Both will attack the socialist voice first before resuming their own contest. ‘

……………………………………………………………………

1) The problem is that liberalism is elitist as is fascism.

Indeed it is , hence why I include this site constantly to rub in the nose of liberalists close cousins, neo – liberals…

2 ) For both power is for sale and leading doesn’t in any way involve service to people.

Exactly . And this is what the neo liberal reforms in NZ were all about , – both back in 1984 through to 2017. Nothing has changed.

3 ) ‘This means that liberal media will always prefer a straight contest between liberalism and fascism rather than giving true socialism a voice. ‘

The ONLY reference to the French situation that the NZ Media have to offer to New Zealanders is NZ First ,- in a poor and failed example of media representation of fascism if ever there was – and yet that doesn’t stop the NZ Media from trying it on, – and failing miserably every time.

And that is PRECISELY the conditions we have experienced in THIS country. And has been made noticeably worse under John Key with this media sycophancy .

And that is WHY , historical critiques such as that provided by Hugh Price / Price Publishers is so vital to understand in this country today , and also the accompanying provided links regarding the Thule Society :

Good piece there Bill, thank you.
Sorry I missed the thread yesterday, looked like it was a great discussion.

I particularly liked this little gem…
(liberalism)”being an undisturbed parasite within the host body of Left Parties”

As we all know there is that same parasite in-bedded within NZ Labour, and until it is removed, Labour will always look and feel as it does today, a political party that is emaciated and unwell, hollow and struggling for any direction that citizens can relate too, unable (and it seems unwilling) to over come the deep distrust of many former supporters, all the while trying desperately to cling to the centrist life raft, that is obviously (for all to see) slowly sinking itself…very painful to watch.

and now I have a vivid image of Ad (see comment 11) standing in the absolute middle of the sinking centrist liferaft, ankles awash, demanding that those already in the water keep lifting the raft, lest his suit get wet.

Very easy for us white men on the other side of the world to advocate tactically voting for Le Pen. We won’t be the ones getting the sharp end of the fasces. My question is why Bill seems to think the left can’t stand up for itself right now. Why do we need the excuse of a fascist in power to fight free of liberal bullshit? Why keep getting cowed by the Kiwi Blairites telling us “we have to win, at any cost!” as they sell out workers and beneficiaries alike? I guess its easier sitting back going “woe is me, nothing I can do, I need a really really bad rightwing government to start fucking people over before I can do anything.”

You’ve got to wonder why the New Zealand Police undertook an armed response teams (ARTs) trial in the first place? Of course there was the Christchurch mosque terrorism attack, but that was an isolated incident and therefore cannot be used as an excuse to arm Police. What this trial does ...

A chronological listing of news articles linked to on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week: Sun, May 31 through Sat, June 6, 2020Editor's ChoiceThe world must seize this opportunity to meet the climate challengeAs current and former central bankers, we believe the pandemic offers ...

The 60 Years of New Zealand Television celebrations, such as they were, seemed to rely heavily on the classics: here we go again with Lynn of Tawa, A Week of It and the Country Calendar spoofs. Wonderful highlights of our televisual past, to be sure, but after hearing Paul Holmes’ ...

The Two Americas Collide: You gotta love the Americans marching for George Floyd and the fragile promises of the US Constitution. But, you also gotta keep your eye on the pale rider in the White House, and understand that behind him Hell follows.THE FRAGILITY of democracy’s promise is becoming clearer ...

Radical Proposition: The remote possibility that someone in the protest demonstrations might be carrying the coronavirus – and with no cases of community transmission detected for weeks that possibility is extremely remote – could not be permitted to constrain New Zealanders from demonstrating their support for the self-evident truth that black lives ...

Oliver Twist, famously asked for ‘more’. He did not challenge the system of workhouses – Dickens did – nor the authority of Beadle Bumble. He was only nine. I am often struck how critics of the current income maintenance system are like Oliver Twist. They ask for more, but they ...

New Zealand’s history as a sheep-farming nation means the command “Get in behind!” has long had a particular resonance — but not usually for journalists. However, in late March, as panic over the coronavirus pandemic surged around the world, Dr Gavin Ellis — former editor-in-chief of the NZ Herald — ...

This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections The Trump administration, after less than one full first term, has every likelihood of being adjudged the most anti-climate, anti-science, and anti-environment executive branch in U.S. history. With numerous high-level Trump nominees having cut their teeth as lobbyists with major polluting industries, the administration ...

Does National have any chance of winning the election in September? It’s looking very unlikely, especially after National’s change of leadership hasn’t exactly produced Mullermania in the first two weeks. Quite the opposite, in fact, as I summarised in Tuesday’s Political Roundup column: Todd Muller’s torrid start as National leader. ...

Another study comparing effect in children from nonendemic areas (Dagang) and endemic fluorosis area (Jinghai) about 80km apart in the Tianjin area of China. Hardly sampling the same population. Anti-fluoride campaigners still use studies from ...

George Thomson, Nick Wilson, Richard EdwardsThis blog discusses the passing of the Smoke-free Environments (Prohibiting Smoking in Motor Vehicles Carrying Children) Amendment Act last week. We briefly review some lessons from this legislation’s long journey and explore future smokefree possibilities in Aotearoa / New Zealand. A law ...

Last month I noted that the public policy debate was all about how we deal with covid-19. That’s changing now, and will change more over the next couple of months as the buffering impact of the wage subsidy disappears and we see starkly the economic hole out of which we ...

The mission of the New Zealand Police is to make this country the safest nation in the world. To achieve that aim, there is one important step the police need to take at the end of this month. When the evaluation of the Armed Response Teams’ trial is completed, the ...

The right of employees to strike is an internationally recognised employment right that has been a feature of New Zealand’s industrial relations system for over a century, albeit with different constraints and limitations at different times. Although more restricted, this right even continued under the anti-union Employment Contracts Act (1993-2000). ...

Bernard Hickey is one of New Zealand’s leading financial journalists. His latest article, published by Newsroom, lays bare the cruel treatment of hundreds of thousands of workers stranded since the lockdown. Our Prime Minister is lauded overseas for her compassion, but her Cabinet is refusing to properly support tens of ...

For a good part of my adult life I have studied civil-military relations. I have studied authoritarian and democratic variants, and I have studied them across countries and regions. I have also worked in and with several US security agencies and have lectured on the theme at a number of ...

Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nzIf we stopped oil, gas and coal extraction immediately – ...

by The Spark “The system is broken”—the words of a young black man in Minneapolis watching flames destroy a police precinct demonstrators had torched. Broken? Yes, it is! What else could you say about a system whose police for nine minutes casually knelt on a black man’s neck, watching until ...

The latest opinion poll is out, and it’s more bad news for the National Party, with Roy Morgan putting them on only 26.5% support, against Labour’s 56.5%. You can see the details here: Roy Morgan May opinion poll. Roy Morgan is regarded as less accurate than other polling companies, and the ...

When miners pillage conservation land, they are typically required to "rehabilitate" it afterwards. Its not much compared to the damage they do, but its something. But apparently even that is now too much to expect. NZG Limited, a company owned by Oravida directors James Blackwell, Julia Jiyan Xu, Stone Shi, ...

Like everyone else, I've spent too much of the weekend watching the protests in America, and the increasingly brutal response to them. The overwhelming impression is of a nationwide police riot, as people speaking out against a murder and demanding change are beaten, gassed and shot by racist, militarised thugs ...

In mid-April, as New Zealand entered its fourth week of alert level 4, the Prime Minister warned us not to make comparisons with other countries over our Covid-19 pandemic response. This extraordinary advice came after Simon Bridges had urged the government to adopt a less-stringent lockdown similar to those in ...

Wales has lowered the voting age to 16: 16 and 17 year olds can now officially vote in Wales for Senedd elections. Votes at 16 & 17 come into force on Monday, as part of the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Act 2020. Next year’s Senedd elections will ...

The government announced more changes to the ETS today, including to the emissions budget for 2021 - 2025. The overall budget for that period will stay at 354 million tons of CO2-equivalent. But the ETS component of that - stockpile reduction, free allocation, and credits to be auctioned - budget ...

The new National Party leader, Todd Muller, had been at pains to portray himself as a solid, serious, safe pair of hands, in contrast to the increasingly Trumpian leanings of Simon Bridges, who Muller deposed in a leadership coup last Friday. But after an uneventful, if uninspiring, first press conference, ...

Minneapolis Police StationIf you’ve been keeping an eye on recent events in the United States, you’ll likely understand why there’s so much anger on the streets at the moment. Not only did police officers murder another black man; it is patently obvious that authorities initially attempted to cover up George ...

Becoming the leader of a political party is a bit like having a baby. Not so much the screaming and sleepless nights, as the fact that you’ve waited and hope and planned for something and it’s finally here. And when that wonderful gift finally arrives, you want to be ready, ...

The US appears to be headed towards what Antonio Gramsci and other Italian political theorists call an “organic crisis of the State.” It involves the simultaneous and compounded fractures of economy, society and politics, which together constitute a tipping point in a nation’s history. Social contradictions are exacerbated, class and ...

Like the rest of the world, I have been aghast at what I have seen of, and read and heard about, what is happening currently in the United States. It seems incredible that a once great country should be suffering the worst effects and the highest number of deaths worldwide ...

It’s almost painful to watch. Let’s be honest, maybe a pleasure too, in some quarters, but painful nonetheless. Because the fact is, for a democracy to function properly, any sitting Government does need honest and proper Opposition so that it doesn’t get ahead of itself. That’s what we should ...

This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Karin Kirk A banner on the International Energy Agency website spells it out in bold font: “The global oil industry is experiencing a shock like no other in its history.” As the response to the coronavirus pandemic upends the lives of billions of ...

Australia's High Court has ruled that the "palace letters" between the queen and then-Governor-General John Kerr are public records rather than private papers: Historian Jenny Hocking has won her High Court bid to access the letters exchanged between then governor-general Sir John Kerr and the Queen around the time of ...

SATURDAY MAY 30Six60: Live at Western Springs 2020 (TVNZ 1, 8.45pm). Remember live concerts? The day will come again, friends, when we will be able to stand shoulder-to-shoulder in an uncomfortable sweaty venue with people we don’t know. It will happen. Sometimes the sound of concerts drifts over to the ...

New Zealand and its prime minister Jacinda Ardern have received international attention and praise, rightly so, for decisive leadership, clear communication and scientific management of the coronavirus pandemic. Observers point out that the nation has been through multiple crises under Ardern’s leadership – such as the Christchurch terrorist attack and ...

…a lot of things unrelated to the pandemic were happening. Relatively little attention was given to some major events on the global stage, so I thought I would do a quick recap of some of the high (or low) -lights, starting with something familiar. The common theme throughout is human ...

Labour's talk of gutting the RMA to push through "shovel ready" projects to boost employment after the pandemic predictably has every half-arsed pipe-dream crawling out of the woodwork demanding special treatment. Today, it's the West Coast inbreds, who are demanding a host of laws be rescinded so they can dig ...

"I can't breathe, Mama. I'm dying." - Last words of George Floyd.LOOK HARD at this image. Think about what it depicts. Ask yourself how one human-being could behave so brutally when so many eye-witnesses – and very soon millions of people online around the world – were there to watch ...

"You call that a conservative?Nah, this is a conservative!" New Zealanders are in the market for a quiet and reassuring small-c conservative political centrist. The critical question, however, is which politician is currently playing that role? Who has mastered the art of relaxed, informal and intimate political communication? Who ...

I’VE OFTEN WONDERED if South African immigrants passing through towns like Kerikeri and Kaikohe ever wonder how we do it. In their homeland, through the bitter years of Apartheid, keeping the races segregated required pass laws, Alsatian dogs, tear gas, rubber bullets and, all-too-often, live rounds. Not here. Not in ...

Below is the list of gender-critical material which appeared on Redline from July 31, 2019 to September 30, 2019. Sports categories must be by sex, not gender identity Queer theory glossary Woke misogyny and homophobia: a gay critique of trans ideology Another unfortunate experiment? New Zealand’s transgender health policy and ...

Smart Energy Europe: A Plan to provide 100% of ALL ENERGY using Renewable Energy to EuropeIntroductionAll Energy renewable energy systems are often commented on here at Skeptical Science. Many comments suggest that it will be difficult, expensive or impossible to use renewable energy to power the world. To ...

The government released its Action for Healthy Waterways package today, ostensibly with the goal of cleaning up our rivers and making them swimmable within a generation. Doing that, of course, requires confronting the cow in the room: the dairy industry which causes most of the pollution. But while they've imposed ...

Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nzI would like to know if New Zealand’s carbon emissions ...

Simon Lamb, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington and Timothy Stern, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of WellingtonBack in the 1970s, scientists came up with a revolutionary idea about how Earth’s deep interior works. They proposed it is slowly churning like a lava lamp, with buoyant ...

Remember KiwiBuild? Previously the government's flagship policy, it was supposed to build thousands of new homes every year for kiwi families. But instead of flooding the market, we've got a pathetic dribble: The Government's former flagship housing policy is so far behind schedule it will take more than 400 years ...

Don Franks Now Covid-19 restrictions allow gatherings of a hundred, an urgent hui needs calling. A special conference of the Council of Trade Unions. Today, workers face the greatest attack on employment, pay and conditions since the depression, we need a strong united union voice. As it stands now, organised ...

George Henderson New Zealand schools have introduced a climate change resource that suggests children “eat less meat and dairy”, even though teachers will not know how much meat or dairy any child in their care has eaten. Opinion pieces in the papers have called for the reduction of meat and ...

Questioning the number of district health boards in New Zealand has got to the extent that “too many DHBs” has become a perceived truth requiring no further elaboration. It is rarely challenged by policy advisers, academics, and journalists. But when one drills down further it becomes clear that the number ...

The emergence of a new National party leader, seemingly out of nowhere, has – not surprisingly – raised a number of questions as to who Todd Mulller actually is and what makes him tick. He has been an MP for some time but seems to have hidden his light under ...

Is Todd Muller the Ned Flanders of the National Party? This is how he’s been characterised by political commentator Gordon Campbell, who suggests the change in leadership is, in Simpsons terms, akin to swapping the scary and cruel Monty Burns for Homer Simpson’s compassionate but conservative neighbour. There’s almost a ...

We all know that many so-called journalists and political commentators in New Zealand work directly or indirectly for political parties or for certain political factions. This was obviously the case when pundit for hire Matthew Hooton launched a campaign against then National Party leader, Simon Bridges, over their numerous polling ...

Let's Roll! The easy victory over a Bridges-led National Party which the Left had every cause to anticipate just a few days ago is no longer in the offing. Our enemy’s position has changed. His numbers are swelling. A rapid thrust to the left, followed by an audacious outflanking manoeuvre ...

Anyone who keeps an eye on evidence around cannabis and public health will be familiar with the Christchurch Health and Development Study. It's one of two local longitudinal studies frequently cited with respect to cannabis and youth development. But in a new article in the New Zealand Medical Journal, it is ...

In the age of covid we are Jacinda’s team of five million, except for some. There has rarely been a more blatant case of discrimination against beneficiaries than Grant Robertson’s announcement yesterday that people who have lost their jobs because of the coronavirus will receive weekly payments of $490 per week for 12 weeks and $250 per week for part time ...

It was 75 years ago this month that Germany surrendered and the Allies celebrated VE (Victory in Europe) Day. Millions of people around the world had been killed and many more injured or captured. It was an end to war not just for Europeans, but their allies too, in countries across Africa. But its impact is ...

Well, we are out of lockdown, essentially. I did end up getting the wage subsidy while we were on levels 3 and 4 but I would have been fine if we didn’t. The first day of level 2, the Thursday, the office opened again for the people who weren’t able ...

Share this:

Related

Hon Shane Jones, NZ First List MP based in Northland New Zealand First MP Hon Shane Jones has today announced his candidacy for the electorate of Northland. Speaking at a New Zealand First meeting in Kerikeri, Northland, Mr Jones said it was a privilege to be selected by the Party ...

Rt Hon Winston Peters, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters today announced two diplomatic appointments: New Zealand’s High Commissioner to India and Consul-General to Hong Kong. “As New Zealand recovers from COVID-19, our diplomatic and trade networks are more important than ever. That is ...

We started the week by announcing free apprenticeships to support Kiwis into work and to help get New Zealand moving again - and we ended the week by extending the wage subsidy to 40,000 more businesses, helping to protect businesses and workers alike. ...

We’re confident in the ability of Kiwi businesses to succeed in the face of COVID-19, and our Government is committed to doing our bit to enable that success. Kiwi businesses have always been innovative and resilient, and the COVID-19 pandemic has proven this yet again. Many businesses are finding new, creative ...

New Zealand First is pleased to release the names of its first tranche of candidates for the 2020 election. The includes all sitting New Zealand First Members of Parliament except Clayton Mitchell MP who earlier today announced he will not be seeking re-election. In alphabetical order they are: MP ...

Clayton Mitchell MP, New Zealand First List MP based in Tauranga New Zealand First MP Clayton Mitchell has decided not to seek re-election in this year’s General Election. “After serious consideration and discussion with my family, I have decided to pursue other passions in my life and spend a lot ...

Defence Minister Ron Mark has announced that new Lockheed Martin Super Hercules aircraft would replace the outdated and costly 1960s Hercules fleet. The $1.521b project will include a flight simulator for staff training and other supporting infrastructure. "This fleet will ensure the Defence Force can continue to support New Zealand's ...

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has described Labour's original COVID-19 commercial rent dispute proposal as "poorly targeted". Justice Minister Andrew Little hasannounced a temporary law changeto force commercial landlords and renters to consider COVID-19 in disputes over rent issues, almost two months after the Government first floated the idea. But ...

Rt Hon Winston Peters, Leader of New Zealand First New Zealand First acknowledges that some small businesses have been struggling to meet fixed costs due to the loss of revenue by COVID-19. We also know some businesses are at greater risk of insolvency when they cannot come to a reasonable ...

Rt Hon Winston Peters, Leader of New Zealand First New Zealand First is disappointed that the removal of the spousal deductions has had to be delayed by the Ministry fo Social Development, due to COVID19 workload pressures. “New Zealand First has always stood for fairness when it comes to superannuation ...

Rt Hon Winston Peters, Leader of New Zealand First On the steps of Parliament today the Leader of New Zealand First, Rt Hon Winston Peters received a petition from registered nurse Anna Maria Coervers, requesting an amendment to the Protection for First Responders Bill which will ensure the legislation also include registered ...

It's been a busy seven days as we start to rebuild New Zealand together. From delivering extra support for small businesses, to investing in our artists and arts organisations, to cutting red tape on home DIY projects, we're rolling out our plan to get the economy and New Zealand moving ...

Rt Hon Winston Peters, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of State Owned Enterprises KiwiRail’s Northland rail upgrade steps up another gear today and will help Northland recover from the impacts of COVID-19, State Owned Enterprises Minister Winston Peters says. The Government is investing $204.5 million through the Provincial Growth Fund to ...

“Today and every day we stand in solidarity with George Floyd’s family, friends and community who feel pain and fear about his untimely death at the hands of Minneapolis police”, said Green Party Co-leader and Māori Development spokesperson Marama Davidson. ...

Fletcher Tabuteau, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Regional Economic Development Hon Eugenie Sage, Minister of Conservation The West Coast forests of Mount Te Kinga at Kotuku Whakaoho/Lake Brunner are the latest predator free project to receive Government funding, announced Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage and Under Secretary for Regional Economic Development Fletcher ...

The Green Party has begun the process for a Select Committee inquiry into student accommodation, which has been exposed during COVID-19 as an under-regulated sector that straddles students with unfair debt. ...

Budget 2020 is about rebuilding together, supporting jobs, getting business moving and the books back into the black. It’s an integral part of our COVID-19 economic response, and our plan to grow our economy and get New Zealand moving again.Here’s a quick look at the five top things you ...

The Green Party is pleased to reveal its candidate list for the upcoming election. With a mix of familiar faces and fresh new talent, this exceptional group of candidates are ready to lead the Greens back into Government. ...

The Coalition Government has approved $206 million in essential upgrades at Ōhakea Air Base. Defence Minister Ron Mark said the money would be spent on improving old infrastructure. He said safety issues would be addressed, as well as upgrades to taxiways, accommodation and fresh, storm and waste water systems. "This ...

Rt Hon Winston Peters, Leader of New Zealand First “I am not persisting with this case just for myself, but for all people who have had their privacy breached. Privacy of information is a cornerstone of our country’s democracy. Without it our society truly faces a bleak future. We now ...

Share this:

Related

This summer presents a great opportunity for New Zealanders to get out into nature with bookings on Great Walks for 2020/21 set to open next week, says Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage. Bookings for the Great Walks will open between 9 and 11 June, excluding Milford and Routeburn tracks which ...

Extra 40,000 businesses to be eligible for wage subsidy extension Small business cashflow support application period extended The Government is today announcing further support for businesses that continue to be affected by the global COVID-19 pandemic, as the broader economy becomes one of the most open in the world following ...

The Coalition Government has confirmed five Lockheed Martin C-130J-30 Super Hercules transport aircraft will be purchased to replace the existing fleet, Defence Minister Ron Mark announced today. “Last year, Cabinet selected these aircraft as the preferred option to replace the current Hercules fleet. Procurement of the Super Hercules has been ...

The Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage is celebrating World Environment Day with an announcement of a major step towards Wairarapa Moana being recognised as an internationally significant wetland. “Wairarapa Moana is an ecosystem of 10,000 hectares of wetland and open water that provides a home for indigenous fish, birds and ...

New public housing that will save tenants money in energy bills, and provide warmer, healthier and more comfortable homes, is setting the standard for the Government’s future public housing programme, Housing Minister Megan Woods said. Dr Woods opened the new Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities complex, which has a ...

A new-look Police graduation ceremony to take account of COVID19 health rules has marked the completion of training for 57 new constables. Police Minister Stuart Nash attended this afternoon's ceremony, where officers of Recruit Wing 337 were formally sworn in at the Royal New Zealand Police College without the normal support of ...

Mobile traders and truck shops must adhere to responsible lending requirements Interest rate cap on high-cost loans Lenders prohibited from offering further credit to an applicant who has taken two high-cost loans in the past 90 days The Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, Kris Faafoi, has signalled an end ...

94% of firms say wage subsidy had positive impact on cashflow 62% of firms say support helped to manage non-wage costs like rent A survey of business that have received the Government’s wage subsidy show it has played a significant role in saving jobs, and freed up cash flow to ...

New legislation introduced to Parliament today will support growth and assist businesses on the road to economic recovery, said Revenue Minister Stuart Nash. “The Taxation (Annual Rates for 2020-21, Feasibility Expenditure, and Remedial Matters) Bill proposes that businesses can get tax deductions for ‘feasibility expenditure’ on new investments,” said Mr ...

Sport and Recreation Minister Grant Robertson has welcomed the first release of funds from the $265 million Sport Recovery Package announced as part of Budget 2020. Sport NZ has announced that $4.6 million in funding will go to the Wellington Phoenix, NZ Warriors, Super Rugby teams and the ANZ Premiership ...

An iconic New Zealand tourism attraction and the country’s 31 Regional Tourism Organisations are the first recipients of support from the $400 million Tourism Sector Recovery Plan, to help position the sector for recovery from COVID-19, Tourism Minister Kelvin Davis announced today. The plan includes a Strategic Tourism Assets Protection ...

The Government will legislate to ensure businesses that suffered as a result of the COVID-19 response will get help to resolve disputes over commercial rent issues, Justice Minister Andrew Little announced today. A temporary amendment to the Property Law Act will insert a clause in commercial leases requiring a fair ...

The Minister for Small Business says new data from Xero highlights the urgency of prompt payment practices to small and medium enterprises as we move into economic recovery. Last month Government ministers wrote to significant private enterprises and the banking industry to request they join efforts by government agencies to ...

Young people in Waikato will be the first to have free access to period products in schools in another step to support children and young people in poverty,” Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said. During term 3, the Ministry of Education will begin providing free period products to schools following the ...

The Minister of Police Stuart Nash has issued the following statement in response to charges filed against three Police officers this morning in the New Plymouth District Court. “Any incident involving a loss of life in Police custody is taken very seriously. The charges today reflect the gravity of the ...

$196 million for Crown Research Institutes $150 million for R&D loan scheme $33 million for Māori research and development opportunities $12 million for the Nationally Significant Collections and Databases $10 million to help maintain in-house capability at Callaghan Innovation New Zealand’s entrepreneurs, innovators and crown researchers will benefit from a ...

Further temporary changes to NCEA and University Entrance (UE) will support senior secondary school students whose teaching and learning have been disrupted by COVID-19. “The wellbeing of students and teachers is a priority. As we are all aware, COVID-19 has created massive disruption to the school system, and the Government ...

Minister for Racing Winston Peters today announced that the terms for the directors of the Racing Industry Transition Agency (RITA) have been extended to 30 June 2021. Due to the COVID-19 crisis the transition period has been extended to ensure that the Racing Industry Bill can complete its progress through ...

The deadline for landlords to include detailed information in their tenancy agreements about how their property meets the Healthy Homes Standards, so tenants can see the home they are renting is compliant, has been extended from 1 July 2020 to 1 December 2020. The Healthy Homes Standards became law on 1 July 2019. The Standards are ...

Justice Minister Andrew Little today announced details of further appointments to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. “I am pleased to announce Paula Rose QSO OStJ as Deputy Chief Commissioner for a term of five years commencing on 15 June 2020,” said Andrew Little. “I am also pleased to announce the ...

The Targeted Training and Apprenticeships Fund (TTAF) will pay costs of learners of all ages to undertake vocational education and training The fund will target support for areas of study and training that will give learners better employment prospects as New Zealand recovers from COVID-19 Apprentices working in all industries ...

The Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will finally start to cut New Zealand’s greenhouse gas pollution as it was originally intended to, because of changes announced today by the Minister for Climate Change, James Shaw. The changes include a limit on the total emissions allowed within the ETS, rules to ensure ...

Minister for Pacific Peoples Aupito William Sio says the Queen’s Birthday 2020 Honours List provides an abundance of examples that Pacific people’s leadership capability is unquestionable in Aotearoa. “The work and the individuals we acknowledge this year highlights the kind of visionary examples and dedicated community leadership that we need ...

The Government is backing a new $27 million project aimed at boosting sustainable horticulture production and New Zealand’s COVID-19 recovery efforts, says Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor. “Our horticulture sector has long been one of New Zealand’s export star performers, contributing around $6 billion a year to our economy. During and ...

The Queen’s Birthday 2020 Honours List once again highlights the dedication by many to looking after our native plants and wildlife, including incredible work to restore the populations of critically endangered birds says Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage. Anne Richardson of Hororata has been made an Officer of the New ...

The Government will invest $10 million from the One Billion Trees Fund for large-scale planting to provide jobs in communities and improve the environment, Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor and Forestry Minister Shane Jones have announced. New, more flexible funding criteria for applications will help up to 10 catchment groups plant ...

Organisations that support women are invited to apply to a new $1,000,000 fund as part of the Government’s COVID-19 response. “We know women, and organisations that support women, have been affected by COVID-19. This new money will ensure funding for groups that support women and women’s rights,” said Minister for ...

Healthier waterways are front and centre in a new project involving more than 300 King Country sheep, beef and dairy farmers. The Government is investing $844,000 in King Country River Care, a group that helps farmers to lift freshwater quality and farming practice, Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor announced today. “Yesterday ...

A major funding package for libraries will allow them to play a far greater role in supporting their communities and people seeking jobs as part of the economic recovery from COVID-19. “Budget 2020 contains over $60 million of funding to protect library services and to protect jobs,” says Internal Affairs ...

A jobseekers programme for the creative sector and four new funds have been set up by the Government to help our arts and music industry recover from the blow of COVID-19. Thousands of jobs will be supported through today’s $175 million package in a crucial economic boost to support the ...

Minister for Veterans Ron Mark has welcomed the First Reading of a Bill that will make legislative changes to further improve the veterans’ support system. The Veterans’ Support Amendment Bill No 2, which will amend the Veterans’ Support Act 2014, passed First Reading today. The bill addresses a number of ...

Views sought on Order in Council to help fast track the reinstatement of the Christ Church Cathedral The Associate Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration, Hon Poto Williams, will be seeking public written comment, following Cabinet approving the drafting of an Order in Council aimed at fast-tracking the reinstatement of the ...

The law setting out New Zealanders’ basic civil and human rights is today one step towards being strengthened following the first reading of a Bill that requires Parliament to take action if a court says a statute undermines those rights. At present, a senior court can issue a ‘declaration of ...

Thousands of artists and creatives at hundreds of cultural and heritage organisations have been given much-needed support to recover from the impact of COVID-19, Prime Minister and Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Jacinda Ardern announced today. “The cultural sector was amongst the worst hit by the global pandemic,” Jacinda ...

Key New Zealand assets will be better protected from being sold to overseas owners in a way contrary to the national interest, with the passage of the Overseas Investment (Urgent Measures) Bill. The Bill, which passed its third reading in Parliament today, also cuts unnecessary red tape to help attract ...

Setting higher health standards at swimming spots Requiring urban waterways to be cleaned up and new protections for urban streams Putting controls on higher-risk farm practices such as winter grazing and feed lots Setting stricter controls on nitrogen pollution and new bottom lines on other measures of waterway health Ensuring ...

The Government is on the verge of reaching its target of state sector boards and committees made up of at least 50 percent women, says Minister for Women Julie Anne Genter and Minister for Ethnic Communities Jenny Salesa. For the first time, the Government stocktake measures the number of Māori, ...

ANALYSIS:By Denis Muller of theUniversity of Melbourne When a newspaper with the authority of The New York Times chooses to publish a party-political essay calculated to further inflame the violence wracking cities across America, serious questions arise. On June 3 the Times published in its opinion section an ...

For all The Spinoff’s latest coverage of Covid-19 see here. Read Siouxsie Wiles’s work here. New Zealand is currently in alert level two – read The Spinoff’s giant explainer about what that means here. For official government advice, see here.The Spinoff’s coverage of the Covid-19 outbreak is made possible thanks to donations from Spinoff Members. ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Noble, Education Policy Fellow, Mitchell Institute, Victoria University Three quarters of a million Australian children are likely to be experiencing employment stress in the family as a result of COVID-19. This is on top of around 615,000 children whose families were ...

Spice up the classic banana muffin with a subtle touch of star anise.These muffins came about one rainy Saturday when the cupboards were bare and there was nothing much left in the fruit bowl aside from some very sad-looking bananas. Fortunately we know sad bananas result in the best kind ...

For years, Work and Income has been telling New Zealanders they couldn’t get the benefit until their redundancy payments ran out. Turns out, it was wrong.What’s all this then?Work and Income has long told New Zealanders receiving redundancy payments that they weren’t eligible for the benefit until their redundancy money ...

New Zealand writer Anna Rankin reports from Los Angeles. Last Friday afternoon, I went downtown to a protest outside the enormous Los Angeles Police Department headquarters on 1st Street. The LAPD had set up cordons, placing orange cones across streets to block traffic. Arms crossed, they stood with a wide ...

Until the sudden closure of Bauer Media in April, Simon Farrell-Green was the editor of HOME, New Zealand’s oldest architecture magazine. Here he explains what comes next.Being the editor of a major architecture magazine was the best job I ever had. I got it in 2016, after a career spent ...

A global success story or an overly generous, unsustainable scheme that is doing lasting damage to our fish stocks? Ethan Neville looks at the ongoing debate over New Zealand’s fishing quota management system. The management of our fisheries is a touchy topic – and why wouldn’t it be? New Zealanders ...

By RNZ News Thousands of people were protesting across Australia today to oppose the deaths of Indigenous people in police custody. It comes as Black Lives Matter protests are held around the world after the death of George Floyd at the hands of a white police officer in the US ...

For all The Spinoff’s latest coverage of Covid-19 see here. Read Siouxsie Wiles’s work here. New Zealand is currently in alert level two – read The Spinoff’s giant explainer about what that means here. For official government advice, see here.The Spinoff’s coverage of the Covid-19 outbreak is made possible thanks to donations from Spinoff Members. ...

One press statement from the Beehive yesterday sounded more like advertising – or a barker’s pitch – than a Government announcement. Another advised of two diplomatic appointment, one of them – has the woman who landed the post done something wrong? – to protest-troubled and politically volatile Hong Kong. And ...

It’s not often that someone graduates from university one year and becomes a senior economist commentating on national media the next. George Driver investigates the meteoric rise of the high-flying Brad Olsen.Google “senior economist Brad Olsen” and you’ll find him quoted in no fewer than 167 articles in the past ...

As public sentiment turned against Uber Eats, a new local operation emerged promising a more ethical alternative to help New Zealand’s struggling hospitality industry. But now Eat Local NZ has suspended trading after falling out with its Australian partner Mr Yum. So what happened?A dispute between local hospitality platform Eat ...

By Budi Sutrisno in Jakarta As the death of George Floyd, an African-American man who died while being arrested in the United States, sparks a global outcry, Indonesian rights advocates and young people have stepped forward to remind fellow citizens that racism has long been an issue at home as ...

Edward Cullen became a vampire to survive the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918. Now a new Twilight novel looms and Laura Surynt, a New Zealander living in the UK, wants to live forever too. As I lay in bed this morning watching Instagram stories, Tayi Tibble told my reluctant little Capricorn ...

Over the lockdown period, thousands of people joined a Facebook group dedicated to remembering the nightlife of inner-city Auckland. Its creator Simon Grigg explains why it touched a chord in lockdown.Within a few days of The Lost Nightlife of Inner-city Auckland Facebook page accidentally going live on May 12, we ...

Throughout Anglo colonial states there is a constant habit of defining people who aren’t white as a problem, writes Aaron Smale in this personal essay. It was a balmy summer evening in the capital and cops were standing over a young brown man. I was walking down Courtenay Place on ...

"The countdown clock ticks 2, then 1, then the prime minister raises her drink": dystopia, by Ōtautahi writer Laura Borrowdale. You stand in the centre of the room, and around you, the guests seem to swirl and blend into one. There’s a mouth, gaping and red, filled with laughter. A ...

Martin Luther King Jr said in 1963: “America has given the Black people a bad cheque, a cheque which has come back marked ‘insufficient funds’." Six generations of egregious police violence later, the sentiment out of which those bad cheques were born could be shifting. In the wake of egregious police violence, ...

WATCH: In a candid interview on Sky Sport, Dame Susan Devoy talks on her concern for rising sports stars, the state of NZ squash, and the spectre of racism. Dame Susan Devoy is proudly still “a little terrier who fights for the underdog”. “I have been doing it all my life and ...

Of the huge funding boost coming for early childhood education, Playcentre has been left with just the crumbs, writes Kate Barber. Amidst all the celebration of the $430m funding boost for early childhood education (ECE) announced in this year’s budget, little attention was paid to the plight of Playcentre. The ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vikrant Minhas, PhD candidate, University of Adelaide Although bacteria are single-celled and microscopically small, they still need energy to survive, just like us. One of the most efficient ways of acquiring energy for bacteria is through sweet, soluble carbohydrates: sugars. In fact, ...

PACIFIC PANDEMIC DIARY:By David Robie Three cartoonists had especially poignant takes on the tragic and toxic political aftermath of martyr George Floyd’s brutal killing under the knee of a white American policeman in Minneapolis last week. The Boston Globe’s Christopher Weyant featured a split frame contrasting a red-capped “Make ...

Are central bankers jealous that epidemiologists are the rock stars of the current crisis?There is talk that both the British and New Zealand central banks might institute negative interest rates as part of the policy response to the Covid shock. While Sweden’s central bank ended its five year experiment ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Monika Sarder, Senior Strategic Analyst, Monash University Algorithmic decision-making has enormous potential to do good. From identifying priority areas for first response after an earthquake hits, to identifying those at risk of COVID-19 within minutes, their application has proven hugely beneficial. But ...

LISTEN: This week's Extra Time podcast discusses racism in sport and the role of athletes and organisations in making a stand for good. Former Silver Fern and Black Fern Louisa Wall believes today's sports stars must have a social conscience and stand up against discrimination and divisiveness. Sport and politics, once ...

Auckland writer Caroline Barron has a terrific book out today called Ripiro Beach: A Memoir of Life After Near Death. Here, she writes about the memoirs that have been a balm, a lesson, or both. Throughout my life, I’ve sought solace between the covers of books, particularly memoirs. There, I’ve learnt ...

An exclusive interview with Steve McSteverson about his traumatic and tragic ordeal this week.Many New Zealanders are struggling with the news that a children’s book not commissioned or authorised by Jacinda Ardern was advertised in a newsletter for children’s books. This horrific attack on New Zealanders whose ears are permanently ...

Air New Zealand staff are dismayed and angered at the company’s announcement to cut a further $150 million from their wage bill. On Friday, the company’s Chief Executive Officer, Greg Foran, made the announcement to employees, who are still ...

The Herald reported this morning that MediaWorks was on the verge of selling its TV assets to US TV giant Discovery – but an internal email and senior source suggest the story may have been premature.A senior MediaWorks source has emphatically denied a report in the NZ Herald that a ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gery Karantzas, Associate professor in Social Psychology / Relationship Science, Deakin University Life in lockdown has been tough on many relationships. But negotiating the transition back to “normal” as restrictions continue to lift could also be a challenge for couples. So what ...

A slight bounce in the economy is brightening the outlook as the country heads into the winter months, Radio NZ reports. Retail spending is up and NZ shares rose on Thursday for a third day running. Key indicators have led some economists to point to a faster recovery than expected. ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Geoff Hanmer, Adjunct Professor of Architecture, University of Adelaide HomeBuilder is a good idea gone bad. It is possibly the most complex and least equitable program the government could have devised to deliver construction jobs. It gives $25,000 to people who already ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Keller, Professor of Cognitive Science, Western Sydney University The coronavirus pandemic has silenced the world’s concert halls and opera theatres. Organisations specialising in live performance face an existential crisis under current restrictions on social gatherings, with up to 75% of people ...

Finance Minister Grant Robertson, wearing his Sport and Recreation ministerial hat, can show he can be a big spender and draw voters’ attention to his largess each time he dispenses money from the funds under his control – or the control of an agency within his ministerial bailiwick. Yesterday he ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pi-Shen Seet, Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Edith Cowan University Scott Morrison wants to overhaul the skills workforce to ensure a better post-COVID-19 recovery. But there may not be enough people with the necessary skills to do so. And travel restrictions, which ...

As we transition out of a Covid-focused world and prepare for what comes next, New Zealand’s ICT industry is gearing towards growth.From app development helping track the Covid-19 virus to website engineering keeping businesses in touch and online, ICT knowledge has been crucial to keeping New Zealand working over the ...

Analysis: As New Zealand eases restrictions, it no longer has international precedent to look towards and must decide on its own how to reopen the economy while reducing the risk of a second wave of infections, Marc Daalder reports While most of the country eagerly awaits a likely move to ...

Ten days is too long. That from insurance claimant advocate, Ali Jones. EQC has today made contact with homeowners via email after accidentally releasing confidential details of 8000 insurance claims on May 26. Jones says although she has not received ...

The only published and available best-selling indie book chart in New Zealand is the top 10 sales list recorded every week at Unity Books’ stores in High St, Auckland, and Willis St, Wellington.AUCKLAND1 Girl, Woman, Other by Bernadine Evaristo (Penguin Classics, $24)Winner of the 2019 Booker Prize. The other day, ...

Simon Day discovers how the voluntary carbon market allows both individuals and companies to offset their emissions at the same time as investing in native forest regeneration.When Celia Wade-Brown sold her first batch of carbon credits earned from the native forest on her Wairarapa farm, she had two customers: Z ...

Simon Day discovers how the voluntary carbon market allows both individuals and companies to offset their emissions at the same time as investing in native forest regeneration.When Celia Wade-Brown sold her first batch of carbon credits earned from the native forest on her Wairarapa farm, she had two customers: Z ...

Analysis by Keith Rankin. Keith Rankin. The conversation around the 2020 covid19 pandemic has been widely framed as ‘health versus the economy’. It has been quite political, with people leaning to the left emphasising ‘health’, and people leaning to the right emphasising ‘the economy’. A couple of weeks ago ...

Sam Brooks pays tribute to Alex Rider, and the new TV series that (finally) captures the spirit of the books.“What if James Bond was a teenager?”The concept for Anthony Horowitz’s Alex Rider series is so simple but so brilliant. There’s a reason why the franchise has managed to sustain 12 ...

Analysis - The PM resists pressure to move immediately to level 1, Winston Peters' tactics play into the hands of the Opposition and the government at last works out a commercial rent solution, writes Peter Wilson. ...

Source: Council on Hemispheric Affairs – Analysis-Reportage By COHAFrom Washington DC Federal charges against the four protectors of the Venezuelan Embassy, who defended the building in Washington DC against violent opposition crowds for several weeks between April 10 and May 16 of 2019, were completely dropped in a case that ...

Source: Council on Hemispheric Affairs – Analysis-Reportage By COHA Editorial TeamFrom Washington DC The Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) joins the Black Alliance for Peace[1] and other pro-democracy organizations throughout the world in calling for the United Nations to address the systemic violations of human rights by the police and ...

Being shot by police had a profound, transformational effect on Rob Mokaraka’s life in more ways than you’d expect. A new documentary, airing on Māori TV at 7.30pm on Sunday, explores the work he’s done to heal his own mind and to ensure nobody has to go through the same ...

Human rights watchdog TAPOL has condemned the demand by Indonesian prosecutors seeking 17 and five years imprisonment for West Papuan activists Buchtar Tabuni and Irwanus Uropmabin. On June 2, the Jayapura District Prosecutor’s Office issued 33 pages containing charges against the defendant Irwanus Uropmabin. In the document, the Public Prosecutor ...

The arrival of Dan Carter is far from the first time the ever-struggling Auckland team has hoped to turn around its fortunes with a star signing, writes Jamie Wall.New Zealand rugby Twitter is a generally desolate place, especially lately given that there’s been nothing to talk about ever since the ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robyn J. Whitaker, Senior Lecturer in New Testament, Pilgrim Theological College, University of Divinity US President Donald Trump delivered an address this week in which he threatened military action on the nation. Then he walked to the nearby St John’s Episcopal Church ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vincent Ho, Senior Lecturer and clinical academic gastroenterologist, Western Sydney University Why do we burp? We sometimes also burp before meals, why does this happen? — Ahaana, age 7 That is a really interesting question, Ahaana! There ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justine Bell-James, Associate Professor, TC Beirne School of Law, The University of Queensland After years of litigation, Australia’s highest court will today make a major decision on the fate of the controversial proposed expansion to the New Acland Coal mine in Queensland. ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elise Klein, Senior Lecturer, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University Robodebt isn’t the only measure the government should consider withdrawing. Late last Friday, after a long press conference from the prime minister which avoided any mention of the topic, the ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julian Meyrick, Professor of Creative Arts, Griffith University What keeps democracies together? As America burns, Brazilians die and Europe braces for another wave of the coronavirus, the question assumes an alarming immediacy. If the answer is complicated in one way, it is ...

For all The Spinoff’s latest coverage of Covid-19 see here. Read Siouxsie Wiles’s work here. New Zealand is currently in alert level two – read The Spinoff’s giant explainer about what that means here. For official government advice, see here.The Spinoff’s coverage of the Covid-19 outbreak is made possible thanks to donations from Spinoff Members. ...

Good morning and welcome to The Bulletin. In today’s edition: Millions of dollars divvied up by Sport NZ, MSD’s problem with wrongly denied payments grows, and internal coalition battles emerge in time for election.It’s Friday, and there hasn’t been a lot of it recently, so we’re going to start with ...